UPDATED: O'Reilly Can Get the Same Ad Rate as MoveOn.org at the NY Times

Despite what journalist Bill O'Reilly said today on his radio show about MoveOn.org receiving a special discount rate for their NY Times' General Petreaus display ad, based on the fact that the Times is in bed with Moveon.org and George Soros.

Referring to a report from ABC's Jake Tapper, he said that Moveon.org received a 65% discount as a "family discount," because the Times and Moveon are in bed with each other; that "if you're a left-wing smear site the Times will give you a discount." My guess is that his 65% discount came from a misread of a right wing web site.

Problem is, Bill O'Reilly could get the same rate OR LOWER!

So says, Katherine Mathis, Vice President of Corporate Communications at the Times.

"It has nothing to do with ideology," said Mathis today, "It has to do with the day it appears and how it is placed."

The Times advertising department categorized the Moveon's ad as an "advocacy" (cause and appeal) ad, and the rate isn't based on which side of the political aisle you're on. It depends on any number of factors, including whether the ad is in color or black & white and the manner of placement.

Tony Snow told Sean Hannity he heard that the Times and Moveon were in collusion.

Bill said that others who advertise in the Times are going to be up in arms to find out how Moveon.org. received the special rate.

All they have to do is contact the Times. They'll be glad to take your money and place your ad. If you want to leave the day and section placement a bit loose, you might get the same rate or better than MoveOn did.

Even you, Bill.

And you don't even have to crawl in bed with George Soros.

BTW, Bill said his people can't get an answer from the Times. I made one call.

Spreading a story before he substantiates it. Some journalist.

UPDATE: On Friday morning, even with the Times policy in front of him, Bill said that MoveOn received their discounted rate from the Times because "they are simpatico with MoveOn," and that the Times was then forced to give Giuliani the same rate.
Steve Young is author of "Great Failures of the Extremely Successful" www.greatfailure.com and his weekly Sunday column appears every Sunday just to the left of Bill O'Reilly's in the L.A. Daily News

Comments

[WHATEVER7]

What else would you expect from a teetotaling Irishman? Now that's a oxyMORON if I've ever heard one.

[Wilson33]

Man your right hand has got to be tired of jo to Bill O.!

And you believe the NYT?

[ihavenobias]

After skimming your profile...

Before you type another word, do a google search for David Brooks and then Tom Friedman and read some of their work.

Then come back and report how "liberal" those two NYT writers are. Granted, there are plenty of other writers on the staff aside from those two, but don't pretend like everything in the paper is a bunch of "liberal BS".

[yellowdogSC]

ihave,

Yes, friend, this one's a REAL piece of work.

I guess you saw the "95% liberal press" comment? You may have seen my 2 responses, and ZERO replies to them.

Immediately below is a GREAT one. Starts right at the TOP. You WON'T be disappointed:
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jill-filipovic/questions-for-prolifers_b_58563.html

The PAGES of response will restore your faith. It was so great I printed it out to save forever.
(This is pretty old, so not likely still in BIO history.)

[B8ovin]

No WAY. Bill O'Reilly being less than honest with the "folks"? That's depossible. But when you're the only moral patriot in the U.S.A. maybe sometimes the ends justify the means. What would the world become if a major story like the Move.On ad wasn't covered, uncovered and recovered by Mr. "I'm not god but I'm always right" O'Reilly?

[SensibleAmerican]

"Spreading a story before he substantiates it. Some journalist"?!
When has Bill Orally EVER substantiated a story?! It's little wonder that Keith O' hammers him just about every day for the same reason!

Calling Oh'Liely a "journalist" is like calling a drizzle a Cat5 hurricane!

[postedby]

O'Reilly himself says he is NOT a journalist ... he is an analyist.

As to the real story ... let's wait and see ... of course the NYT is going to say what they said ... someone is probably going to look into their past history to see what they've been doing, and will be watching more closely after this.