MoveOn.org Gets Discount Rate For ‘Betray Us’ Advocacy Ad - Page 2

rhinefire · 09-13-07, 12:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niftydrifty

"Last week the New York State Conservative Party paid $45000 for a full-page ad in The New York Times. It was knocking Senator Moynihan for voting against going to war in the Gulf."

link

You better come up wth a better example than that one!! Try again.

aquapub · 09-13-07, 04:24 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niftydrifty

Cmon. This story is hilarious. We have a disastrous occupation underway with no good solution. So the only way to argue "for" it is to whine and lie about those whom oppose it.

I don't know enough about this to know if the industry standard is for political crap like this to get such discounted rates, but this characterization of what's happening here isn't true.

More than anything, this is about conservatives having trouble believing that the most treasonous paper in this country's history, notorious for it's egregious left-wing slant and for endorsing every single Democrat Presidential candidate in the last 60 years or so just happened to be the paper a hysterical left-wing fringe group took out a smear ad on.

niftydrifty · 09-13-07, 04:35 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquapub

I don't know enough about this to know if the industry standard is for political crap like this to get such discounted rates, but this characterization of what's happening here isn't true.

everything I found online this morning, every example, paid LESS than MoveOn did, not more. I posted em all, and you didn't address them. denial is aquapub's and rhinefire's method of debate, obviously.

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquapub

More than anything, this is about conservatives having trouble believing that the most treasonous paper in this country's history, notorious for it's egregious left-wing slant and for endorsing every single Democrat Presidential candidate in the last 60 years or so just happened to be the paper a hysterical left-wing fringe group took out a smear ad on.

I would have trouble believing all of that too, considering that the paper was a mouthpiece for the Bush administration, in the run up to the war.

Sergeant Stinger1 · 09-13-07, 04:43 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquapub

I have yet to find a "mainstream" media source for this, but still thought it was worth posting:

Webloggin - Blog Archive » MoveOn.org Gets Discount Rate For â€˜Betray Usâ€™ Advocacy Ad

"Jake Tapper at ABC News reported that MoveOn.org paid $65,000 for its full page anti-war advocacy sliming of General David Petraeus. This figure raised the suspicions of attentive blogger Confederate Yankee whose intuition appears to be correct. (h/t Michelle Malkin) While looking up the current New York Times rate book he discovered that MoveOn.org received a $102,000 discount on the standard political advocacy rate that is advertised at $167,157."

So Democrats unanimously endorse Petreus to fix this war they voted for only to turn around and stab him in the back once he starts to succeed. Sixty years of perpetual treason.

---
Speaking about treason, when will Bush be tried for treason?

chevydriver1123 · 09-13-07, 05:00 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by niftydrifty

everything I found online this morning, every example, paid LESS than MoveOn did, not more. I posted em all, and you didn't address them. denial is aquapub's and rhinefire's method of debate, obviously.

I would have trouble believing all of that too, considering that the paper was a mouthpiece for the Bush administration, in the run up to the war.

All of corporate media was pushing for the war not just the New York Post. I was for the war originally, I believed on what Colin Powell said about the WMDs. I have only been against the war for about a year, but I do realize that leaving the country before the Iraqi's can defend themselves will be a big mistake and start the domino effect just like what happened in Vietnam.

niftydrifty · 09-13-07, 05:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by chevydriver1123

All of corporate media was pushing for the war not just the New York Post. I was for the war originally, I believed on what Colin Powell said about the WMDs. I have only been against the war for about a year, but I do realize that leaving the country before the Iraqi's can defend themselves will be a big mistake and start the domino effect just like what happened in Vietnam.

The New York Times (not the Post) went beyond many when it had Judith Miller publishing articles on WMD in Iraq. in at least one instance, in hindsight, it was obviously calculated. the Judith Miller piece ran in the Sunday paper, and then administration officials would appear on the Sunday talk shows and cite the New York Times as a source for the latest news about WMD findings.

dclxvinoise · 09-13-07, 05:20 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquapub

I don't know enough about this to know if the industry standard is for political crap like this to get such discounted rates, but this characterization of what's happening here isn't true.

More than anything, this is about conservatives having trouble believing that the most treasonous paper in this country's history, notorious for it's egregious left-wing slant and for endorsing every single Democrat Presidential candidate in the last 60 years or so just happened to be the paper a hysterical left-wing fringe group took out a smear ad on.

You and your ilk throw around the word treason like cheap candy. Here's a little hint: Just because the other side has opinions that you don't like or they play the political game a bit differently doesn't mean that they are guilty of treason. It's called politics, get used to it. Both sides are often sneaky and underhanded. It's idiotic to call foul when the other side does it, when Conservatives are just as guilty of it.

aquapub · 09-13-07, 06:18 PM

Clearly this is an agenda-driven process:

TIMES GIVES LEFTIES A HEFTY DISCOUNT FOR 'BETRAY US' AD | By CHARLES HURT Bureau Chief | National News | US News | Current National News

"According to Abbe Serphos, director of public relations for the Times, "the open rate for an ad of that size and type is $181,692."

A spokesman for MoveOn.org confirmed to The Post that the liberal activist group had paid only $65,000 for the ad - a reduction of more than $116,000 from the stated rate.

A Post reporter who called the Times advertising department yesterday without identifying himself was quoted a price of $167,000 for a full-page black-and-white ad on a Monday."

Captain America · 09-13-07, 07:52 PM

Sounds biased to me too. But what would you expect considering the source?

I wonder if SwiftBoat ads were cheaper on FOX than they were on MSNBC?

Trajan Octavian Titus · 09-13-07, 08:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aquapub

I have yet to find a "mainstream" media source for this, but still thought it was worth posting:

Webloggin - Blog Archive » MoveOn.org Gets Discount Rate For â€˜Betray Usâ€™ Advocacy Ad

"Jake Tapper at ABC News reported that MoveOn.org paid $65,000 for its full page anti-war advocacy sliming of General David Petraeus. This figure raised the suspicions of attentive blogger Confederate Yankee whose intuition appears to be correct. (h/t Michelle Malkin) While looking up the current New York Times rate book he discovered that MoveOn.org received a $102,000 discount on the standard political advocacy rate that is advertised at $167,157."

So Democrats unanimously endorse Petreus to fix this war they voted for only to turn around and stab him in the back once he starts to succeed. Sixty years of perpetual treason.

What media bias?