This New York Times is very misleading. The GAO’s main objections was that these agencies were disseminating information without full disclosure that the dissemination was paid by the federal gov’t and that the information came from the federal gov’t, which is illegal according to a statute that was passed a little more than a year ago. Armstrong Williams has a tv show, that does not make him a journalist. The GAO has a very good point regarding disclosure but the New York Times’ tone make it sound like newspapers and and news rooms are too stupid to know when they are disseminating news and when they are disseminating advertising. We surely don’t believe that do we?
This New York Times is very misleading. The GAO’s main objections was that these agencies were disseminating information without full disclosure that the dissemination was paid by the federal gov’t and that the information came from the federal gov’t, which is illegal according to a statute that was passed a little more than a year ago. Armstrong Williams has a tv show, that does not make him a journalist. The GAO has a very good point regarding disclosure but the New York Times’ tone make it sound like newspapers and and news rooms are too stupid to know when they are disseminating news and when they are disseminating advertising. We surely don’t believe that do we?