Slamming The New York Times

No, it is not John McCain's campaign. It is the San Francisco Chronicle of all media outlets. They blast the Times for it's report on McCain, calling it nothing more than gossip – and a discredit to the profession of journalism. 

The fact that some of McCain's advisers were "convinced the relationship had become romantic" in 2000 is not the same as them having evidence of infidelity. It is a suspicion, otherwise known as gossip. If these anonymous sources did have persuasive evidence of such misconduct, they either failed to provide it to the newspaper – or the newspaper declined to offer it to its readers.

Allegations that senior campaign advisers were so concerned about the McCain-Iseman relationship that they "took steps to intervene" – a top aide said he met with her in Washington – were wrapped into a 3,000-word, textured piece about McCain's quasi-cozy interactions with various special interests. Much of it centered on his solicitations of donations from companies that lobbied his Senate Commerce Committee. Iseman represented telecommunications companies that had a huge stake in the committee's decisions.

But Times editors had to know that the suggestion McCain was having an intimate affair with a woman who was lobbying him was far and away the most serious and sensational allegation in the story. The posting of the story on the Times Web site instantly caused a crawl-line explosion on cable news Wednesday night. Both McCain and the Republican Party seized their moment of indignation to blast out fundraising pitches. "We'll never match the reach of a front-page New York Times article, but with your immediate help today, we'll be able to respond and defend our nominee from the liberal attack machine," the McCain campaign said in its e-mail solicitation to donors.

Regrettably, the Times left itself and our profession open to such allegations of bias by publishing soft-focus evidence of what would be an outrageous breach of public trust.

Pretty strong stuff from an unexpected source. The Times slime job is rapidly unraveling with a report that the former head of lobbying for Paxson denying any meetings and casting doubt on reports that the former CEO of that company ever did, either.

WASHINGTON – A former Paxson Communications president said Saturday he never met with John McCain about the Arizona senator writing letters to the Federal Communications Commission regarding the regulatory delay of a Pittsburgh TV station sale.

Dean Goodman, who was in charge of the company's lobbying efforts in 1999, told The Associated Press he also doubts that chief executive Lowell W. "Bud" Paxson met with McCain over the issue, and said he doesn't recall such a meeting.

McCain's presidential campaign said the Arizona senator and then-chairman of the Senate Commerce Committee did not meet with Paxson or his lobbyist, Vicki Iseman, before sending the letters, which have drawn controversy in recent days. But Paxson told The Washington Post in a story published Saturday that he and "probably" Iseman met with McCain on the matter several weeks before the senator sent the letters.

Goodman, who left the company a year and a half ago, took issue with that account in a telephone interview from West Palm Beach, Fla.

"I never met with or discussed this with Senator McCain," Goodman said. "I don't recall Bud meeting with McCain. It would be extremely rare that there would be a meeting that I didn't attend, and I can tell you that I didn't have a meeting with McCain on this issue."

"Whether Bud discussed it with him or not, via some other mechanism, I can't rule it out," Goodman added. But, he said, "I don't think there was a meeting."

This is a classic, innuendo-driven hit job by the Times. The paper is rapidly descending into irrelevance. Even fellow journalists are appalled by the Times behavior. That should tell you a lot.