NY Times and MoveOn.org (Bedfellows?)

The New York Times’ public editor Sunday became the latest public figure to slam the paper over a controversial ad by MoveOn.org that criticized Gen. David Petraeus, the top U.S. general in Iraq.

And should we be surprised?  While I am completely disgusted by the New York Times’ horrific handling of this debacle (from actually publishing the ad to playing politics accross the board), I am happy to see an emplyee standing up for what’s right.

All we hear about is how FOX News is spreading Bush’s agenda, but when things like this happen, there tends to be an aura of dead silence.  Where are all of the WhereIStand bloggers to detest this horrific display of political parsonage?

Clark Hoyt, who analyzes the paper’s coverage as the "readers’ representative," wrote, "I think the ad violated The Times’s own written standards, and the paper now says that the advertiser got a price break it was not entitled to."

The group, Hoyt wrote, paid $64,575, which is the paper’s "standby" rate — meaning it cannot guarantee placement on a certain day. The group wanted it to run on Sept. 10, the day Petraeus testified to Congress about the state of affairs in Iraq, and it did, meaning MoveOn should have paid $142,083, he wrote.

Titled "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" the ad called Petraeus "a military man constantly at war with the facts," and cited previous quotes of his, contrasting them against quotes from independent reports and news stories.

Hmm. Seems to me that the Times is at war with journalistic principles and the like. Typical.