Comments on: What’s wrong with this picture?

By: Chas Rich

Chas Rich — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 13:52:32 +0000

Sadly no. And what makes it worse is that the “off-the-record” requirement comes from Justice Scalia. Whenever he speaks he will not permit taping or feeds. There was a similar restriction when he spoke at the Cleveland City Club a couple years ago.

By: Nick Watts

Nick Watts — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 03:58:10 +0000

Yes.

Yes I do.

By: Carson Fire

Carson Fire — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:21:40 +0000

Sounds like a lot of oversized journalistic egos clashing, signifying nothing.

By: Jorge

Jorge — Wed, 30 Nov 2005 00:16:11 +0000

Business is as business does!

By: Peter

Peter — Tue, 29 Nov 2005 22:57:53 +0000

Well, T-W is first in the business of business. Right? or am I missing something?

By: Kim

Kim — Tue, 29 Nov 2005 20:39:23 +0000

Anytime you talk in front of a crowd and you are not explicitly in a one-to-one situation, your conversation is not “off the record.”

By: Scott Ferguson

Scott Ferguson — Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:13:23 +0000

Doesn’t the WaPo do an annual off-the-record schmoozefest with public officials? Maybe I’m wrong about this.

By: I.F. Stoner

I.F. Stoner — Tue, 29 Nov 2005 19:01:58 +0000

Hmmm, isn;t this the same Time Inc. that in it’s never-ending quest for truth, justice and the American Way (read: First Amendment) moved to hide the details of their libel suit broguht by Alabama football coach Mike Price. The Wall Street Journal actually filed court papers to get Time to allow the public to see details. Where’s Time’s commitment to the First Amendment now?

You wonder why people hate the press? One good reason is that — even in those danged Red States — people see the hypocrisy of American media multiconglomerates for what it is.

By: Ruth

Ruth — Tue, 29 Nov 2005 17:15:24 +0000

Maybe they’re hoping no one will notice.

And what would that have had to do with the SC losing its marble?