Quote Originally Posted by Psycho4Bud
Since "news sources" are suppose to give all sides of a story with an unbiased position, I take it that both of you don't regard the New York Times as a credible news site? This seems rather ironic considering on how everyone from the left has been "Bush bashing" on such things as censorship, etc....

Have a good one!:s4:
Ha ha! The editorial staff sending back your op-ed peice for a rewrite is not censorship. Censorship is when you actively prevent a person's message from being published, not when you decline to pay to publish it for them. McCain has thousands of ways to get his opinion heard --- no one has censored him.

Also, the op-ed page is not a news story. In a news story, the reporter should seek out all the information and opinions and present them without bias. But that doesn't mean the editor is required to run all op-ed peices reflecting every single point of view. If I send in a letter to the editor, and they don't publish it, it does not mean I have been censored.

I'm sure the Times will run a piece by McCain if he writes a newsworthy one. The Times endorsed McCain for the Republican nomination, and they have run 7 op-ed pieces by him in the past, so I think they are treating him fair enough. I think McCain is making a big deal about this because he wants to be seen as being the victim of unfair media coverage.
dragonrider Reviewed by dragonrider on . Times takes Obama article but rejects McCain The New York Times has reportedly rejected an editorial written by Republican presidential candidate John McCain less than a week after publishing an essay by Democratic candidate Barack Obama. The US website, Drudge Report, said the paper had refused to publish Mr McCain's piece, which was a rebuttal to Mr Obama's article title 'My Plan for Iraq'. According to the site, the paper's opinion page editor David Shipley wrote to McCain's staff: "It would be terrific to have an article from Rating: 5