NH Union Leader drops ad by llepard

[SteveMartin]

bump

 

[Menthol Patch]

The paper is claiming it is an honest mistake. No surprise there.

They will run it tomorrow on Page A2. Tommorrow is not Sunday.

I am going to sleep on the matter.

But, my initial reaction is that one day is not going to satisfy me. I think I am going to continue with my original plan. Tomorrow I will be getting a lawyer involved.

We do not know if it was intentional or not, although my gut tells me it was.

I would really like to know what the deal is so I think I will keep pushing.

Good night. LWL

Push for it to run TWICE!

 

[Dan Klaus]

Oh lord, this is a private dispute between llepard and the Union Leader. Please don't involve yourself directly or make threats on his or the grassroots behalf. That is totally counterproductive.

WTF is up with new people on this forum and running around making threats on behalf of the grassroots? That's totally irresponsible.

Mrkurtz - what in the world are thinking about? Let Lepard handle this on his own....good lord!!!

 

[Charles Wilson]

Yes, but.

If I sue them, like i intend to, I can depose all of their employees to find out how this advertisement conveniently got left out.

Now, all those employees may lie under oath, but I am willing to take those odds.

Everyone calm down, we will get to the bottom of this.

Firm peaceful solutions.

Imagine how much trouble they will have if we can find an insider who will tell us there was an effort to keep the ad out.

LWL

Larry I want to thank you for all that you are doing in your support of Ron Paul. If you do decide to sue the newspaper it will give us a good opportunity to find out -- through depositions -- how the MSM coordinates between each of the networks, etc,, to deny Ron Paul equal coverage. The MSM is working hand in glove with the GOP leadership. I have no doubt that there is a conspiracy -- overt or covert -- to silence Ron Paul. This is a blatant attack on democracy and should not be tolerated. I will particapate in a fund raising to help with your legal expenses if you decide to go forward with a law suit.

 

[tsetsefly]

The paper is claiming it is an honest mistake. No surprise there.

They will run it tomorrow on Page A2. Tommorrow is not Sunday.

I am going to sleep on the matter.

But, my initial reaction is that one day is not going to satisfy me. I think I am going to continue with my original plan. Tomorrow I will be getting a lawyer involved.

We do not know if it was intentional or not, although my gut tells me it was.

I would really like to know what the deal is so I think I will keep pushing.

Good night. LWL

was it run in other NH newspapers?

 

[Laja]

Okay, here's what I got today from the Union Leader:

As promised, I've inquired about the ad that did not run in Sunday's editions. As you probably know, it ran on Page 2 of the lead section today. When the advertising VP learned about the problem last night, he came into the office and made sure that the ad ran on the best possible page in the following edition. The newsroom gave up Page 2, which had been planned as a news page, to allow that to happen.

Charles Perkins, UnionLeader.com

 

[cchapman84]

I work for a national magazine, and I have to say that accidents do happen, and sometimes ads get dropped (and since Murphy's Law always applies, it always seems like the worst possible ad gets dropped - either the one from that big client that took you months to score, or the one that's paying full rate card, or the one that you know is going to raise a giant stink). Sounds like they handled it quite well (probably the same way we would have handled it). Accidents do happen, and as long as they've done something to make it up to you, I'd say it truly was an accident.

 

[torchbearer]

A2 is good placement.

 

[LizF]

Okay, here's what I got today from the Union Leader:

As promised, I've inquired about the ad that did not run in Sunday's editions. As you probably know, it ran on Page 2 of the lead section today. When the advertising VP learned about the problem last night, he came into the office and made sure that the ad ran on the best possible page in the following edition. The newsroom gave up Page 2, which had been planned as a news page, to allow that to happen.

Charles Perkins, UnionLeader.com

Wow...thanks for the update!

A2 is good placement.

Indeed it is!

 

[ItsTime]

not acceptable, they placed it on Monday and think that has the same circulation as Sunday???? Tell them you do not accept and should have asked before they ran it today.

Okay, here's what I got today from the Union Leader:

As promised, I've inquired about the ad that did not run in Sunday's editions. As you probably know, it ran on Page 2 of the lead section today. When the advertising VP learned about the problem last night, he came into the office and made sure that the ad ran on the best possible page in the following edition. The newsroom gave up Page 2, which had been planned as a news page, to allow that to happen.

Charles Perkins, UnionLeader.com

 

[Laja]

BTW, my original letter to him was very professional and allowed that it was a mistake on their part. He was very cordial and very helpful. In today's reponse back to him, I thanked him for the Page 2 newspage and discussed some of the issues we Ron Paul supporters have with mainstream media in general, and how we've become very sensitive to occurrences like this. The email was friendly and I wished him a happy new year. Then I included two links to the video's "A New Hope for America 2.0" and "Ron Paul Rising."

I think we can make friends with the press by being professional and non-accusatory.

 

[ItsTime]

bull$hit A2 of MONDAY's paper??? give me a f-ing break. They need to refund him and run the ad again. Monday's ads cost less and get less circulation.

A2 is good placement.

 

[Laja]

not acceptable, they placed it on Monday and think that has the same circulation as Sunday???? Tell them you do not accept and should have asked before they ran it today.

It may not have the same circulation today, but there will be lots of people who've taken off from work and will be reading the paper. Everything always seems to work out for the good of Ron Paul, even though at the time, it looks bad.

The ad may be read today by someone who'll make a world of difference who didn't read yesterday's paper. Let's be positive and let's not alienate ANYONE in NH, especially the media.

 

[ItsTime]

when they did not run one of Skiing ads, they ran it twice. They should do the same because this is a bigger error.

It may not have the same circulation today, but there will be lots of people who've taken off from work and will be reading the paper. Everything always seems to work out for the good of Ron Paul, even though at the time, it looks bad.

The ad may be read today by someone who'll make a world of difference who didn't read yesterday's paper. Let's be positive and let's not alienate ANYONE in NH, especially the media.

 

[SteveMartin]

The real story, I suspect, has yet to be told.

I am willing to bet the farm this was no "innocent mistake."

 

[Laja]

It's Time, your anger is frightening me and I don't think it's going to help our cause one bit. In fact, just the opposite.

 

[FireofLiberty]

The placement for Monday was good but the circulation on Sunday is not the same as a Monday, it's much less on a Monday, and I'm sure that an ad in the Monday edition would cost significantly less than one in the Sunday edition.

In short, I don't think this is acceptable at all. My advice to llepard would be to get his lawyer to make some noise and get them to run it again in this coming Sunday's edition.

 

[Ozwest]

A2 on Monday is a poor replacement for Sunday regardless of positioning. The Union Leader needs to do better than that. Much better.

I'm not buying the "honest mistake" defence.

As llepard has already questioned, would the same have occurred if it was a John McCain ad?

Jeepers Peepers!

 

[krott5333]

I just wrote to the Union Leader with this message... Critique/use as you like:

I have been informed by my fellow Ron Paul supporters that your newspaper has blatently censored a full page ad sponsored by a private individual. This ad was supposed to run in this Sunday's edition; and by performing this act of censorship, you have eliminated the last holiday Sunday exposure for this ad. A Monday run of the ad has far less exposure than a Sunday one, and a following Sunday ad will not have the New Year's Day party chatter to benefit it.

I and my fellow supporters are prepared to go to every single one of your advertisers and sponsors to inform them of organized boycotting of their businesses should they continue to fund your newspaper. You know the impact this act of censorship has on the campaign, and you also know what a sponsor-wide boycott will also do to your bottom line.

I would highly suggest to you and your editors to negotiate a fair deal with Mr. Llepard to ensure this act of censorship is properly compensated.

STAY OUT OF IT!



sometimes I don't understand how some of you are smart enough to support Ron Paul, but stupid enough to think doing something like this is a good idea.

 

[Ozwest]

Addenda: It's January the 1st in Australia.

Happy New Year you "kooks!"