Time to bash the GOP.

[Art]

I don't know how well-known Delgaudio is or was Jimbo. I think child porn people should be outed by all news organizations in the area this person resides. As background to your commentary here I looked up the Post's coverage and saw the lawyer was Bruce Fein, not Bruce Blair.

I think Fein writes for the Times too, so I don't know that it matters.

Anyway, the conclusion I would draw from this is simple. The Times should have broadcast this message from the mountaintop. It shouldn't matter if the person is well known or not at all known. Child porn convictions need to be communicated to the public in the area of your readership. I don't have any idea what the Times policy is for this sort of coverage. Delgaudio is not a person who'd been in the paper before so I don't think he was famous.

The only question I'd have out of this is whether the coverage in the Post and the Sun is more indicative of bias than the Times lack of coverage. Meaning, would the Post and Times have written such a story if one guy wasn't a GOP fundraiser and his brother wasn't an "anti-gay" activist? I have no idea. I would like to think politics would play no role at all in that, but I suspect the only reason for the coverage in the first place -- since not all child related sexual crimes are reported -- was because he had an association with the GOP while the Times didn't cover it perhaps because he was in association with the GOP, or perhaps because not all child porn cases are covered.

But, my personal feeling that child porn crimes should be reported every day in every way so people know about them in an area, I'm not sure this is necessarily the same thing as we're talking about in this thread. But, again, it's a perfect illustration as to how the left will defend the indefensible.

Would be nice if you could just come right out without any doubt and state what is clear in this case. You can't and you, and Gbear have now used examples that are far from similar -- though yours may have more bite than his -- to actually defend what the Times has allowed to happen. That's not good.

[JimboDaMan]

Of course you suspect the problem is with the other guy, Art. Your worldview won’t allow you to acknowledge that an arrest and conviction of a local political figure is news, even local news (which is how the Post reported it), when it reflects poorly on your team. I suspected that you would suspect as such.

But let’s at least be honest with what I’ve posted here. My ‘defense’ of the Times has clearly been that they’ve been more stupid than dishonest – but anyone involved with deliberate fabrications should be immediately fired.

[Art]

Jimbo,

Perhaps you misunderstood what I said and if so I am sorry for not speaking more clearly. When I said the only question I would have is whether all child sexual convictions are reported in all local newspapers or not. If not, then was this a story because the guy was at least somewhat known as a GOP activist? If so, then, that's wrong.

I'm pure on this issue. The Times would be wrong to not run this story because the guy was a GOP activist. The Times would also be wrong not to run this story even if the guy was a nobody but who lived in the reading area. But, I don't think the Times or the Post or the Sun report on all child sex crimes in their readership areas.

Since they don't, the question I have is while the Times was wrong in either case, could the reason have been because they don't always cover such cases anyway or not and since the Post and Sun don't always cover such cases anyway, could the reason they did was because it had GOP there?

I want ALL of these cases written about. Perhaps you agree.

But, knowing that all of these cases aren't written about, my one question would be whether this case was more newsworthy to some media because it had a somewhat active GOP person involved. You presume, perhaps fairly, that it was not covered by the Times because he was a GOP activist.

It could just be the Times doesn't report on the probation pleas for men convicted of thinking 16-year-old girls are hot. Hell, didn't we have an academy award winning movie about that dark aspect of some human males?

I don't know which it is. And I wasn't critical of the Post of the Sun. I would be critical of them if they don't cover all of the same type cases all the time and they only did here because it had GOP. Hopefully that's more clear.

[RiggoDrill]

Originally posted by Tarhog

You'll never glean the full truth about any subject by reading articles or surfing the web. Your best chance is to get involved in real world events and draw your own conclusions from experience when possible.

True, Tarhog, but I would add to that list of methods: Painstaking Research.

Consider Watergate. That was an honest -to-goodness, genuine, 100% USDA-choice conspiracy. But Woodward and his team did painstaking research to substantiate their claims. That's the only way it became credible.

Most other "conspiracies" are just lazy and shallow constructions. Heck, you could practically train a chimpanzee to start with a few crackpot theories and then play "connect-the-dots" with a handful of news articles.

Most news is poorly verified and/or regurgitated lazily from wire reports. To subtantiate the conspiracies ASF (or Chomsky for that matter) puts forth would take many years, multiple researchers and lots of money ... not to mention the necessary humility to constantly check one's assumptions and give weight to plausible alternatives. :laugh:

[AdmiralWaugh]

You can't indict a movement by the New York Times, and you also can't claim the NYTimes isn't biased toward the left. They clearly are from their coverage to the very diction in their reports. From the editorials to the culture they perpetuate. However, they certainly are still the paper of record and a great institution. It's hard for anyone to not be biased. My favorite paper, the Wall Street Journal, clearly is so.

But let's look at Blair. I don't understand how you can claim this as oversight on the part of the NYTimes. That's ridiculous. They had numerous complaints about him, he should nothing but incompetence, and they *gave him time off*. Were his skills such that he warranted such an action, whereas laying him off and finding someone else would not only be less costly but justified as far as the work? I am hopeful this will be a lesson to the NYTimes and to other papers: use your common sense, not some silly, unrealistic ideology to run your lives and works.

They're like the people who say communism works in theory. Look, if communism works in theory, then so does Star Trek. Give me a break.

[JimboDaMan]

Art, a couple of things.

First, while I can't say all cases of this type are routinely reported (how would I know?), I do know that its not at all abnormal to see them. Usually there is another hook to hang the article on - the contact was over the Internet, it involved a ring of high school prostitutes, there was incest by a church pastor, or commonly, the perpetrator is a public figure of some kind. This would normally qualify, IMHO.

As far as I'm concerned about the Post covering it because he's a conservative, right back atcha. No way do I think the Times passes this one up if the creep was a Democrat. I will grant you, though, that the Post managed to include the words "Republican" and conservative" right in the opening sentence and showed some bias there.

In re-reading this, what really disturbs me is they catch this guy with pictures of him actually having sex with these underage girls. But he's only charged with the porn and not statutory rape, and he gets off with just probation. I also didn't like the sound of this, although I'm not clear what it means:

As part of a plea agreement on the felony charge, Baltimore Circuit Court Judge John M. Glynn placed Delgaudio on probation, ruling that if he meets the conditions of probation, the judge will not convict him.

How does one plead guilty and receive a sentence without getting convicted? I guess it means if you get in trouble you might want to call Attorney Fein for some help.