Why do you only believe something if published in NYTimes, and not when it's broken

[sinkingfeeling]

a week before by Truthout?

Today, there must be at least 5 threads on the 'Greatest Page' about the NY Times article on Bush's taking 'more control' of agencies. There are at least another 5 or 6 threads that haven't yet made it to the greatest. Why so much concern now? Does everyone dislike the 'news' that comes from Truthout?

I posted the same information from Truthout last week and got a whole 3 responses.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=103&topic_id=259066

[meegbear]

1. Because I didn't see nor read the TruthOut story?

:shrug:

[Jackpine Radical]

2. For the same reason a botched study from Harvard

carries more scientific weight than a botched study from a lesser school.

[RagingInMiami]

3. Because the NY Times has more at stake when it comes to risking its

credibility. It also has the power to change national perception while Truthout, so far, has the power to change a certain segment of the blogosphere.

[frylock]

14. the ny times? credibility?!!

surely you jest.

[LoZoccolo]

4. It pays to be 24 business hours ahead of the news cycle!

:thumbsup:

[unpossibles]

5. for the same reason that I will trust a story more from any

"reputable" media source over Newsmax, etc.

It's not that the story was wrong, but that when presenting a big story from a smaller news source, many will question the source itself. I like Truthout, by the way, but they do not carry the weight of the larger outlets, even though in some ways they may be more reliable since they are not as much in the corporate MSM.

[Lasher]

6. There are many good threads that sink like stones.

I don't think there's any one reason for that, most of the time it just seems to depend on the way the wind is blowing at the time as much as anything else. Some folks manage to get their OP noticed by repeatedly kicking it themselves and posting another separate OP to ask that people to look at the first one. You might help your chances of getting famous if you employ such tactics. I don't think they are discouraged by the mediators, but I personally prefer to just lay out my humble contributions and let them get noticed - or not - without taking steps such as these. But that's just me.

Others get noticed because they have earned reputations here as good contributors. And a well worded subject line can make a big difference. Judging from your Truthout OP that doesn't seem to be a weakness for you but I thought it was worth mentioning.

And finally, it is actually more noteworthy if an article is published in the NYT than at Truthout. Nothing personal against Truthout, I think it's an excellent resource. But I'm just sayin'.

Try not to get your feelings hurt over this. Some very fine contributions sink like a stone for no apparent rhyme or reason. It happens all the time. Don't get discouraged and keep 'em comin'.

Lasher:hi:

[northzax]

7. cause Karl Rove was never indicted?

[BurtWorm]

10. There it is.

That one story finished Truthout for me. I used to tolerate getting inundated with their e-mails when I never asked to be on their list because I thought, at least they're spamming for a good cause. Now they're just spam to me. It's sad, really.

[Nye Bevan]

8. .

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=364x1179819

[proud2BlibKansan]

9. I don't trust the NY Times

One of their reporters lied to me this weekend about that spitting incident at the march.

[Warpy]

11. A lot of us give major news items the 72 hour sniff test.

The major news can be reported in the MSM or the blogosphere. If it's way out of the ordinary and not released late Friday afternoon, we should all give it the sniff test.

People lie to blogs. The MSM lies to us. That's why so many of us get very suspicious about anything but the same old, same old.

[Robbien]

12. The left doesn't use its media sources. The right exploits theirs

There are many leftie media sites with very good investigative reporters. They get very little attention.

A rightie rag such as Insight who has a hack for an editor and who uses only unnamed reporters and unnamed sources, this rag is ones of the ones the right pushes for Swiftboating purposes.

The right has Drudge, the left has nothing. The left has many sites which could easily be much better than Drudge, but the left doesn't support them in the way the right supports Drudge and CNS.

[EFerrari]

13. I trust TO over NYT any day. Must have missed your thread. n/t