tatement by Eli Pariser, MoveOn.org Political Action Executive Director, Resolving the NYT

[robcon]

Source: PRNEWSSITE

"In the Public Editor column of today's New York Times, the Times' vice president admits that, without the knowledge or consent of MoveOn.org Political Action, the Times
"made a mistake" in charging MoveOn its standby rate of $65,000 for the
advertisement run on Monday September 10. According to the Public Editor,
the Times' vice president admitted that the company's advertising
representative "failed to make it clear that for that rate the Times could
not guarantee the Monday placement but left MoveOn.org with the
understanding that the ad would run then." According to the Public Editor,
"the group should have paid $142,083."
Now that the Times has revealed this mistake for the first time, and
while we believe that the $142,083 figure is above the market rate paid by
most organizations, out of an abundance of caution we have decided to pay
that rate for this ad. We will therefore wire the $77,083 difference to the
Times tomorrow (Monday, September 24, 2007)...."

Read more: http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/09-23-2007/0004668013&EDATE=

---

I joked earlier on DU that the NYT would bill Moveon for the difference. It turns out Moveon paid without being asked.

[rocktivity]

1. TORO TURD!

Didn't NYT tell them that ANY advocacy group could get the discount if they allowed NYT to run it anytime within seven days? So how could it have been a mistake? I thought the point of the discount is that they would NOT guarantee the day of placement. If the ad rep "left" MoveOn with an "understanding," should the paper make up the difference by running another MoveOn ad for free? Something tells me that NYT got leaned on. By the way, has Rudy Guiliani mailed in what he owes on the ad he ran?

:headbang:
rocknation

[Kagemusha]

2. Yeah, it reads like the public editor's full of it on this.

MoveOn definitely burying that manure so we can all move on though.

[creeksneakers2]

8. Rudy laughed in the Times' faces

Rudy's spokeswoman said paying wouldn't make the "sweetheart deal" between the Times and MoveOn.org right. Rudy got caught lying about the Times a week ago and he's doing it again. Why not? The Times just showed what cowards they are.

I don't believe a word of the "mistake" excuse. The Times caved to pressure, period. Now that the right wing knows the Times is weak they will never stop shoving the Times around. Wingers are already demanding an investigation.

[Stevepol]

3. K&R!

[BrklynLiberal]

4. Good ;for Pariser. He took the fuse out of the firecracker. Now lets see what they can find to

whine about...

[Cha]

5. Recommended! Good On Eli

Pariser! It was worth it..unfortunately, betrayus will more than live up to the name bestowed on him by our Soldiers.

[Mozcram]

6. Boo!

Should they really have paid out of their
precious funds that can be used for so much?

[Jackpine Radical]

7. Yes, of course.

First, the publicity is worth the extra bux. Also, it keeps them out of the mud & squelches any nonsense about being favored by the "liberal" (snork!) NYT.

[lligrd]

9. MoveOn Can Afford It With All The Donations They

received due to the Repug condemnation. Think I will send them another $100.

[fasttense]

10. Me too. n/t

[Carolina]

12. Actually it's an effort by the

NYT to get its filthy, blood-soaked, */war supporting hands on the money that MoveOn raked in as a result of responses to the ad. It ticks me off 'cause it smacks of breach of contract but that's okay 'cause it inspires me to give more to MoveOn, too.

[mainer]

11. I've written checks for full-page NYT ads. $65,000 going rate.

The rate Moveon.org originally paid was the rate that's quoted to businesses in general. I don't think ANYONE pays the higher rate. This is bullshit.

Now, will Rudy Giuliani pay the higher rate as well?

[Carolina]

13. Exactly

this is crap. It's extortion and breach of contract.