Now is the time at Ed Driscoll.com when we juxtapose!
James Taranto, yesterday:
The Times’s description of the event is artfully constructed to be literally truthful while conveying a false and damaging impression. Facts are omitted that demonstrate beyond any doubt the propriety of Scalia’s conduct. Also, the formulation “a group of representatives led by Representative Michele Bachmann of the House Tea Party Caucus” could–but does not–refer to the Tea Party Caucus itself, of which Bachmann is chairman.
AdvertisementLast week we characterized this passage as follows: “Here the Times deceives its readers in an effort to defame Justice Scalia.” We chose these words with precision: The Times did not lie outright; rather, its deception consists in the omission of some pertinent facts and the misleading presentation of others. And the Times did not defame Justice Scalia, which would require it to make false statements of fact about him; it merely participated in an effort to do so.
“How can voters be so ill informed [sic]?”
– Paul Krugman, New York Times columnist, yesterday.
(Concept via SDA)
When does the NYT reach the point where one can say without even reading it that the bulk of what is printed in it is misleading, deceptive or an outright lie and stand a better than even chance of being correct? Or is that landmark already in the rearview mirror?