I was getting tired of hearing everything pro-Kerry from the Times, so I decided to do a little looking and very shortly after starting, I found what I thought was the case all along. The New York Times, which advertises itself as containing “All The News That’s Fit To Print,” a slogan that suggests objectivity, has myriad and dubious financial and political ties to John Kerry’s presidential campaign. These links between Kerry and the Times seriously call into question the objectivity of that allegedly impartial media outlet, which has enormous power and influence over public opinion. According to major news outlets, including the Times, the fact that a major Republican donor has contributed money to the group known as Swift Boat Veterans for Truth calls into question the impartiality of that group and ties it to the Republicans. If that is indeed the case – that an exchange of funds between an entity and a partisan contributor dispositively links the entity to a partisan cause – then, by their own logic, the Times is unquestionably linked to Kerry's campaign and other far-left groups. To understand the severe implications of such a link, one must fully comprehend the power and reach of the New York Times. As of March, the Times had a total circulation volume of 1,133,763 copies daily. However, the circulation volume of the paper itself does not reflect the paper’s total impact on the marketplace of information. The New York Times Co. publishes the New York Times, the Boston Globe and 16 other newspapers; owns eight network-affiliated television stations and two New York radio stations; and has more than 40 Web sites, including NYTimes.com and Boston.com. Columns appearing in the NYT are syndicated throughout this extensive media network. Further, network and cable news anchors tend to lead with stories substantively taken from the front page of the NYT. Thus, the reach of the NYT and its incalculable power to influence the marketplace of information and ideas evince a media juggernaut beyond that of any other single information source in existence. More salient, though, is the fact that the Times, as an alleged media outlet, escapes regulation under McCain-Feingold campaign finance "reform." The network of financial connections between Kerry's campaign and the Times is extensive. Although the Times has an allegedly official “ban” on political campaign contributions, a simple search on “opensecrets.org” reveals that at least two editors in the employ of the Times, Christine Muhlke and Elizabeth Stewart, have contributed at least $1,500 to John Kerry’s campaign efforts. These are individuals who have direct influence on the selection of stories that run in the Times and its companion magazine – and they are on the record giving money out of their own pockets directly to the Kerry campaign. At least two other employees of the Times – Alan Flippen and William Usuik – have contributed $1,250 to Kerry. Alternatively, not a single employee of the Times has contributed to President Bush or any other Republican candidate or organization. This fact, i.e. the fact that influential individuals working for the New York Times have contributed money directly to Kerry, and Kerry alone, is quite troubling and seriously calls into question the objectivity of that news outlet. Further, the financial connection between John Kerry, the Democrats, and the New York Times goes beyond mere employees. The New York Times Co. is effectively owned and controlled by the Sulzberger family. At least one Sulzberger family member, Dr. Judith P. Sulzberger (who owns, de jure, approximately 5 percent of the New York Times voting shares, or over about 7 million shares), has donated the maximum ($2,000) directly to Kerry (on March 8). Dr. Sulzberger has also contributed $5,000 to “Victory Campaign 2004” (which finds radical leftist 527 groups such as Americans Coming Together and The Media Fund) and $20,000 to the Democrat National Committee (DNC Services Corp.). So, in the aggregate, an individual exercising de jure ownership/control over the New York Times Co. has donated in excess of $27,000 to Kerry and other far-left efforts to defeat the president. The New York Times, in major stories, has used donor-donee connections to call into question the credibility and objectivity of Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Therefore, in all fairness, the same standard should be applied to the Times in assessing its credibility and objectivity. When applied to the New York Times, the financial connections between that media outlet, John Kerry, and other far-left groups organized to defeat the president raise serious doubts about the objectivity and credibility of the Times itself. Jonathan M. Stein is a third-year law student at Hofstra University and has been published in NewsMax, the Washington Times, the Washington Dispatch and FrontPage Magazine. In June he filed a formal complaint with the Senate Select Committee on Ethics against Sen. John Kerry for receiving his full salary in violation of 2 U.S.C. Section 39, which mandates that senators shall be docked their salary for missing work. The committee dismissed the complaint, but Stein will be pursuing further legal action in Federal District Court. He also filed a petition with the Federal Trade Commission in August claiming that the New York Times' slogan "All The News That's Fit To Print" and the Times' use of "push-polling" violate section 5 of the Federal Trade Act and are illegal "deceptive practices" under that section of the federal law.