October 1, 2001

5:18 PM

How Sleazy Sellers Rake in Big Bucks on the City's Suffering.When I saw this headline on the NY Post this morning I assumed that it was an article explaining the Post's marketing strategy. The Post put gratuitous photos of the WTC explosion on the front cover for a story about exposing salesmen who were making money from selling the photos. Good old Rupert!
posted by wsfinkel (2 comments total)

Funny how the local media's cover shots of the two towers burning couldn't be included as examples of that. I guess it's what they consider "their racket".

The brain-dead post makes a further show of its complete ineptitude when it claims that "three shots for $2" is a much, much lower amount than "70 cents a print". Is the editor in a coma over there? 3 shots for $2 = roughly 67 cents a print, for the benefit of the mathematically-challenged Dan Kadison and Jessie Graham, the original writers of the article.

Perhaps the Post ought to go after the scoundrels at TV Guide, which features the Tower 2 explosion on the cover of its latest edition for cable subscribers in the Hudson co. area.
posted by clevershark at 5:35 PM on October 1, 2001

Can't get any sleazier than Murdoch! It's not just that he's sleazy but as wsfinkel points out he is very hypocritical and hypocritical in a very bold fashion.
posted by nofundy at 6:34 AM on October 2, 2001