Its the recall election all over again!
First there was slanted LA TIMES poll (and no one does it better than they do) showing the recall in trouble - when every other poll showed the opposite. Then there was the last minute poll showing the recall in better shape, but still presented in such a way as to cast doubt on the outcome. And - then - the true speciality of the LA Times - any time the candidate they oppose has good news - then the LA Times HAS juxtapose it with another article to counteract the good news.
And, sure enough, directly below the 'Hahn gains ground story', is a massive story that tries to descredit Hahn that could have been run on any day in the past few weeks, but which was held until it was needed. See below:
Hahn Gains Ground, but Villaraigosa Still Leading
By Michael Finnegan
TIMES POLL: The mayor makes inroads among likely black and Valley voters, but his foe still holds an 11-point lead.
• Ad Blitz Attacks Hahn's Record
Hahn Ally Gets Contracts, Influence
By Noam N. Levey, Patrick McGreevy, Deborah Schoch
Niholas Tonsich's law firm benefited from his connections to the mayor.
And, yes -- that is EXACTLY (or as exactly as cut and paste can be) as it reads on the LA Times website at this moment.
One positive headline/story - followed by two negative. It might be a coincidence, of course, except that this same pattern held true over and over again during the recall. And both of these particular stories just happen to be totally under the control of the LA Times, unlike stories such as the Miami donations which another newspaper broke, making their timing and positioning of these two new stories even more suspect.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
4 comments:
Seems like a trend here. They're pushing Villaraigosa, they're doing major reporting on Mexican politics.
I'll be waiting to see if they make the Villaraigosa/Aztlan/MEChA connections. Or remind us of the meetings between Villaraigosa and former president Zedillo, of his dirve to defeat Prop 187, or of his strong support for driver's licenses for illegals,
Monday morning started the same most weekdays do for me. I started my coffee and went out the door to pick up my increasingly-slender LAT from the doorstep, and flipped it right-side up to glance at the front page. My eyes went straight for the Hahn story, and I remember sensing for an instant that the paper maybe was balanced after all. (I vividly remember the campaign agaist Arnold S. during the Davis recall.) Then, I saw the accompanying piece, the basic message coming across to me as "He may be gaining ground, but he's still cannot be trusted".
The LAT takes its side early on any issue, then structures its reporting accordingly. I've seen it time and time again. It is no coincidence. The free LA Weekly has better reporting and a more interesting variety of coverage, than the LAT, which is no longer in search of the truth and making its readers more informed. (I too would love to see Villaraigosa's history with MEChA covered in detail, warts and all, or Gil Cedillo's shamlessness in selling out the state's voters in his pandering to illegal immigrants. but I don't expect it to happen. The Times is an organ of its political allies, always reliable in its sponsorship of the candidate or issue it favors.
And I pay a subscription fee for this?
I'm glad other people are noticing how dishonest the LA Times has become. They no longer even try to pretend their coverage is impartial. I know I will not be renewing my subscription.
There used to be a newspaper saying in journalism school which was "Your opinion is not news". The idea of a newspaper creating news by running a poll at all is outrageous.
Post a Comment