New York Times calls Wall St. Journal what it is: Murdoch propaganda outlet


By GottaLaff

Rumble! Everyone duck and cover!

The Wall Street Journal editor-in-chief, Robert Thomson, has today claimed the New York Times is "uncomfortable" about his paper's increasing success "while its own circulation and credibility are in retreat".

Oh now, that was just rude. Just because a Times column said that the Journal represents right wing talking points and that Rupert Murdoch "plays politics"?

"Principle is but a bystander at the New York Times," said Thomson, in response to a New York Times column by David Carr, which said Murdoch's conservative preferences were infecting news coverage at the paper he acquired two years ago.

Here's a link to Carr's piece. Here's a link to Thomson's statement. So, whatcha gonna do about that little digaroony, New York Times?

Keller later responded:

"While David's column clearly got under Mr Thomson's skin, I don't see anything in this response that casts doubt upon it. The column was scrupulously fair and, if anything, understated, and I have no inclination to help Mr Thomson change the subject," he said.

Take that, Robert Rupert Murdoch Thomson. Well, actually, that was pretty mild. Come on, let's take off the gloves.

Wait. What's that I hear? Sounds like strains from the West Side Story sound track.

Carr's New York Times piece was also critical of Gerard Baker, the Wall Street Journal's deputy managing editor and former Times US editor, whom it called "a neo-conservative columnist of acute political views ... especially active in managing coverage in Washington".

Where's Riff when you need him?

H/t: DCPlod