It looks obvious

I really don’t know how to explain the poor reporting standards by the New York Times.

When the Faux news decides to omit a candidate, although he is doing better than the one they promote it is understandable. After all nobody really consider Faux news to be a news organization so when they clumsily “forget” to mention one candidate on the top screen, when on the bottom they reports his numbers, nobody is really shocked.

But what about the New York Times? Why to report on Giuliani and Thompson, that consistently do worse than Ron Paul, but forget to include Ron Paul himself in the report. What kind of news reporting is it when you do not report the numbers of the one who won second place in Nevada? Why do you report Giuliani’s 0 delegates so far but do not report Paul’s 8?

I had higher expectations from the NYT.

Related posts

• The MSM start to understand, surprisingly (0)
• Little things (0)
• He never heard about us (0)