24 Reporter Pile-on

How the Los Angeles Times Really Decided to Publish its Accounts of Women Who Said They Were Groped ~ Issue Oct 14, 03 “I would like to echo Jill Stewart’s concern regarding the L.A. Times’ selective reporting. Clearly, one can argue that the public had a right to know the sexual allegations directed at Arnold … Continue reading “24 Reporter Pile-on”

How the Los Angeles Times Really Decided to Publish its Accounts of Women Who Said They Were Groped ~ Issue Oct 14, 03

“I would like to echo Jill Stewart’s concern regarding the L.A. Times’ selective reporting. Clearly, one can argue that the public had a right to know the sexual allegations directed at Arnold Schwarzenegger. However, the suspect timing of the publication of the articles coupled with the apparent inordinate manpower (possibly 24 reporters), at best raises eyebrows, and at worst smacks of an obsessive vendetta. Was the Times so anti-Schwarzenegger or so pro-Davis that it lost a sense of objectivity? It would appear so. How else does one explain the Times’ decision not to inform the public about Davis’ alleged physical attacks upon female workers?

Amazing.

(note: this entry WiFi blogged from an open AP.)