Tasini campaign not 'fit to print'?
Over the course of the past year, the New York Times has provided ample coverage to a series of potential U.S. Senate candidates from New York--none of whom are actually running for office. Meanwhile, a candidate who is in fact challenging incumbent Democrat Kirsten Gillibrand in the September 2010 primary has been all but erased from the picture.
That progressive activist Jonathan Tasini is running against Gillibrand, who was appointed to the seat in 2009, is known to Times readers who happened to catch a single January 27, 2010, story by N.R. Kleinfeld, headlined "An Underdog Who Isn't Daunted by a New Try for the Senate"--the only mention to date in the paper of record of Tasini's candidacy, which was launched in June 2009.
Meanwhile, the Times has treated possible high-profile candidacies as if they were real news. Former Democratic Rep. Harold Ford from Tennessee, for example, contemplated a run, which elicited substantial coverage (1/6/10, 2/15/10, 2/19/10, 2/24/10) before Ford decided against the idea. His formal decision to not run garnered him a news story and an op-ed piece on the same day (3/2/10), with a piece the next day (3/3/10) that re-capped the non-campaign. The Times has devoted at least nine articles to other Democrats who thought about but in the end decided not to run against Gillibrand.
Gosh, I wonder why the New York Times is so unfair to Tasini?