Los Angeles City Hall politics revealed from an insider's point of view.

Sunday, April 3, 2011

Mayoral Candidate Kevin James Omited In Biased LA Times Op-Ed

The LA Times chose to ignore Mayoral candidate Kevin James in a blatantly biased Op-Ed pieced dated April 4, 2011.

LA Times writer Jim Newton chose to omit Kevin James
from his review of candidates for Mayor of Los Angeles

 If LA Times writer Jim Newton's op-ed piece gives the appearance to readers that it is simply a fair analysis of potential candidates for Mayor of Los Angeles in 2013, then Newton will have succeeded in deliberately misleading its less well-informed readers. Newton knows that on March 16, 2011, on the steps of the South Lawn of City Hall, KRLA AM 870 talk show host Kevin James announced his candidacy for Mayor, but Newton did not even mention James.

But Newton's op-ed made no mention of the only non-insider candidate, Kevin James, instead focusing on 6 political insiders and developer Rick Caruso, who actually has no serious intention of running for Mayor, but likes to see his name mention whenever potential Mayors are being discussed.

That Newton's op-ed featured a picture of LA City Controller Wendy Greuel is not surprising, she was the first to announce her candidacy.  But Kevin James was the second candidate to announce, and that fact was reported by the LA Times on March 15, 2011.

The LA Times had no problem reporting that Kevin James would be announcing
his candidacy for Mayor, and mention him together with the 7 candidates
selected by Jim Newton for discussion in his op-ed piece.

So what's Newton's game? Does he really have such little regard for LA Times readers that he thinks they will have forgotten what the Times said on March 15?

Does he really think that by deliberately omitting Kevin James from his op-ed, and instead discussing six candidates all of whom have their fingerprints on the monumental failure of this city, LA Times readers will be fooled into thinking there are no other choices?

Shame on you Jim Newton, and shame on the LA Times for thinking its readers are as asleep at the wheel as the six failures you chose to opine as being in any way shape or form capable of having the vision desire and ability to drag the city out of the mess the 'business as usual' brigade have gotten us into.

1 comment:

Sandra Fagan said...

Jim Newton and the LA Times are just two more "Bought and Paid For" members of the Villaraigosa Corrupt Machine, along with almost the entire City Council,DWP and other special interest groups that are filling their pockets with taxpayer dollars, while the City Falls!!!! They must be exposed for their bias for the now Mayor and their Total Disregard for the people of LA and the City itself!!!