Logic would suggest they make ads on both sides of any issue they are giving free advertising for.

@2 sort of undermines their claim that political advertising in newspapers will be effective if they cannot even get the terminology right.

Editorial pages not withstanding, it seems like a company that gets a big ass tax break from the state should be prohibited from this sort of activity.

McKenna is against R-74. He said he voted to approve R-71, but not R-74, and he thinks it is perfectly acceptable to vote on gay people's rights.

Trying to understand the (mis)management at the Seattle Slimes is like trying to understand an Italian train ticket--it's ultimately futile.

All that political money can't corrupt them any more than they are. Can it?

Sounds hugely desperate, misguided and futile. Status quo for the Times.

Does it seem a little less than prudent to back a horse that's not a sure thing? How's it good for business to antagonize a guy with a better than 50% shot at becoming the Gov?

If they want to demonstrate the awesome might of their dead trees, why are they running ads for things they think will win anyway? (taking their word at face wrt McKenna)

Shouldn't they instead run ads for, say, Mickey Mouse or some absurd shit like that if they want to demonstrate the awesome ability of their dead trees to sway morons who vote?

If I still kept cage birds, I wouldn't insult them by putting that rag in the bottoms of their cages. God, the Blethens disgust me.

What?

Just neoliberalism in action. Promote a warm and fuzzy cause that doesn't impact the bottom line while going all out to place a Scott Walker clone in the Governors mansion.

The Seattle Times should put more effort into ethical, honest journalism, rather than desperate attempts to be an edgy "leader." Better yet, this paleolithic irrelevant rag should fold its withered, feeble hand.

There's a world of difference between practicing advocacy journalism (The Stranger) and the craven disregard for manipulating the narrative that the Times is doing. It must be a really tough day to be one of the actual reporters still working there.

Why didn't they initial cap "launches" in the header? Boneheads.

Everyone should protest this vigorously and let them know you'll cancel your subscription if they don't rescind this move. #seattletimessucks.

Hhmmm, the editorial writers at the times cannot prevent themselves from saying nice things about McKenna, witness the column just yesterday by Sharon Pian Chan -"McKenna has done the math on Education." Yet now we are to believe they are independent from the business side? And please, am I the only one who feels it a bit patronizing of the times to also support Referendum 74? You know, lets throw the lefties a bone..wink wink. Even if the times is instrumental in getting that tea bagger pos McKenna elected I don't think it will save their pathetic paper from imminent extinction. I for one won't miss it.