Cancellations Of Subscriptions

[Annie]

I did this when the Tribune got all liberal. My dad ended up resubscribing, but not under my name, which I'd held since 1980. We also subscribe to SunTimes, WSJ. I've already cancelled WSJ print. If one is a long time subscriber, this is actually quite traumatic. I'm used to getting my papers at 5 a.m. or so. For them not to be there, :shocked:

http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/008731.php

June 24, 2006
Goodbye, LAT
by Armed Liberal at June 24, 2006 06:04 PM

[Update #2: See my earlier post on 'News And Citizenship' to understand my take on the broader issues.]

Subject: Cancel Subscription

From: Marc Danziger

Date: 9:54 am

To: [email protected]

cc: [email protected], [email protected]

I've been a subscriber to the Los Angeles Times continuously since I moved back to Los Angeles in 1980.

With this email, I'm asking that you cancel my subscription, effective Monday, June 26, 2006.

Subscription details are:

[deleted]

I'm canceling my subscription because I am appalled that you would publish the details of a legal, effective government program - the financial transaction monitoring program.

The Times and its staff are not above the obligations of citizenship. Those obligations absolutely do extend to vigorously questioning the government about its actions and inactions and continuously challenging it to get better.

But it seems to me that there is a bright line between challenging government policies with an aim to ensuring that it is doing its job, and openly disclosing the mechanics of a program designed to identify those who murder innocent civilians and who have openly declared war on our nation, its people, and on the values that make us who we are.

I'm disappointed in the Times for doing this, and I cannot support you by funding you. I'll miss the paper.

Marc Danziger

Patterico did it, too.

If I subscribed to the Wall Street Journal or the NY Times, I'd cancel those, too.

[Update: Listen to Patt Morrison and Doyle McManus (Washington bureau chief for the LAT) discuss the decision to go to press here (look for 'To Publish Or Not?')
Printer-friendly Version

http://patterico.com/2006/06/24/4767/patterico-cancels-his-subscription-to-the-la-times/

6/24/2006
Patterico Cancels his Subscription to the L.A. Times
Filed under: Dog Trainer — Patterico @ 9:33 am

I cancelled my subscription to the Los Angeles Times this morning.

I explained to the person who answered the phone that I was cancelling because I am outraged that the newspaper revealed classified details of a successful anti-terror operation.

They put me on with a “specialist,” and I repeated the reason for the cancellation. He said they were sorry to lose me as a subscriber. “I’m sorry, too,” I said. And I am. I’ve had my differences with the paper — plenty of them — but I’ve been subscribing since 1993. That’s thirteen years.

He said: “Of course, different people have different opinions about what’s written in the newspaper . . .”

I told him that this has nothing to do with disagreeing with what I read in the newspaper. I disagree with the newspaper all the time. This is different. The newspaper made a deliberate choice to print classified details of an anti-terror operation that, by all accounts, was effective and legal. Key members of Congress had been briefed on it and had no problem with it. Strict controls were in place to prevent abuse, and those controls appear to have been effective.

Moreover, the program had been successful. The government had used it to capture the mastermind of the 2002 bombing of a Bali nightclub. That bombing killed 202 people, I said. I felt myself getting angry all over again as I continued the explanation. That’s more people than died in the Oklahoma City bombing. It’s the equivalent of catching Timothy McVeigh.

I told the man that officials from the Bush Administration had begged the newspaper’s editors not to print this story, but the editors ran the story anyway. I told him that I think publishing the story was completely irresponsible, totally lacking in any justification, and has posed a threat to the safety of our country. And I just can’t continue to subscribe to a newspaper that would do such a thing.

He didn’t argue with me after that.

UPDATE: Marc “Armed Liberal” Danziger cancelled his subscription as well. Although Marc and I speak often, we hadn’t discussed this. We just independently came to the decision that we can’t fund a newspaper that would do something like this.

I hope this becomes a trend.

 

[Stephanie]

I did this when the Tribune got all liberal. My dad ended up resubscribing, but not under my name, which I'd held since 1980. We also subscribe to Sun Times, WSJ. I've already cancelled WSJ print. If one is a long time subscriber, this is actually quite traumatic. I'm used to getting my papers at 5 a.m. or so. For them not to be there, :shocked:

http://www.windsofchange.net/archives/008731.php



http://patterico.com/2006/06/24/4767/patterico-cancels-his-subscription-to-the-la-times/

Good for you
I didn't subscribe to them, so I can't know what your feeling.....
But if I had, I would of been the first in line to cancel my subscription...

This isn't censoring, this is showing a certain company, we will not stand by any longer, and take what their trying to sell........

 

[Adam's Apple]

"I hope this becomes a trend." I share your sentiment, Patterico, and applaud your action in cancelling your subscription to the East Coast's Poison Pen.

If Americans really love their country and want to see the Middle Eastern terrorists defeated, cancelling their subscriptions to the NYT will very definitely become a trend. That miserable "Gray Lady" needs to be put out of business once and for all. Enough is enough. Sedition is sedition, and being a traitor to one's country is the lowest of the low.