December 2014

Sun Mon Tue Wed Thu Fri Sat
  1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29 30 31      
Blog powered by Typepad
Member since 08/2003

« Bush threatens veto of whistleblower bill | Main | Ignorance and Racism in Hazleton, PA »

March 19, 2007


Feed You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.

No one should be surprised to see the Post not at the cutting edge of opinion. (Just as information, I currently subscribe to the Phila. Inquirer and follow the Post and several other papers on-line.)

I am a long time reader of the Post, since, I think, 1968, when I started having it delivered to my dorm room at college.

In the intervening years, working as a road warrior, I've read papers all over the country. Whether or not you or I agree with the opinions of some of its columnists or editorial writers, the Post remains one of the best papers in the USA.

Contrary to the image fostered by Richard Nixon as part of his defense against the Watergate stories and perpetuated by many persons over the years, the Post has never leaned left.

It's always been, in its editorial policy, staunchly and blandly somewhere between slightly right and stolidly, dully middle.

It's strength is its reportage, not its opinions.

It wasn't editorial writers who outed Nixon. It was reporters. And it was reporters who outed Walter Reed Hospital.

The piece I was talking about was in Slate, not the Post per se, and it was not an opinion piece, it was a badly done analysis. I've been reading the Post for a number of years now, but recently its opinion pages have reached a new level of dreck. It used to strike me as more representative of a range of opinions. Now, it seems extreme. Conservatives I can handle, Bush apologists go beyond what I consider to be a reasonable range of opinion.

The comments to this entry are closed.

Support This Blog

Philadelphia Bloggers