(05-01-2018 05:04 PM)tanqtonic Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 02:39 PM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 10:44 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 10:12 AM)OptimisticOwl Wrote:  

(05-01-2018 10:05 AM)RiceLad15 Wrote:  Why was the Washington Post the preferred leak for Watergate?

Two reasons. At the NYTimes you have some of the best reporters with lots of sources that trust them to be confidential with their information. You also have a well-established and trusted newspaper that has credibility is where people will go with information. Because those papers will follow up on leads and make sure (99.9% of the time) that they are true. As much as people love to beat the drum of fake news, the top papers do real reporting and do it well.

Case in point, the Post was able to figure out that a woman was intentionally trying to mislead them about her accusations against Roy Moore, likely in connection to Project Veritas (https://www.washingtonpost.com/investiga...irect=on).

Had the Post not employed good reporters that follow up on their leads/sources, and truly just acted as purveyors of fake news, they never would have found that this woman was trying to mislead them.

So Mueller, Comey, and Democrats of all kinds prefer the NYT for its honesty and integrity? Got it.

What would be your preferred media organization if you wanted to basically blow the whistle or leak information?

If you look at periodicals, which are doing most of the news breaking, you have the NYTime, Post, and WSJournal. All of them have broken stories regarding Trump - it's not as if the Times has a monopoly on Trump breaking news.

I mean, what answer are you looking for? Something to confirm your own opinion about the NYTimes?

If I wanted to "leak" stuff detrimental or demeaning to a person or group,
I would choose to leak it to a paper I knew that also wanted to demean or hurt that person or group. That way I could be more sure that the end result would be publication.

Do you have a NY Times cite for your supposition?