"Is the NYT a Liberal Paper?...Of Course It Is"

[Storebought]

The partisan Democrat ombudsman of the New York Times fully admits the NYT is a very liberal paper whose ideology compromises its ability to report facts fairly.

http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?pagewanted=all&position=

Several noteworthy quotes:

[1] "...for now my concern is the flammable stuff that ignites the right. These are the social issues: gay rights, gun control, abortion and environmental regulation, among others. And if you think The Times plays it down the middle on any of them, you've been reading the paper with your eyes closed."

This quote deseves comment. Okrent is actually referencing a comment Dan Rather made in Bernard Goldberg's book "Bias". In the book, Rather states the NYT reports social issues "straight down the middle." We now know what the NYT ombudsman thinks of Dan Rather's opinion.

[2] "Newspapers have the right to decide what's important and what's not. But their editors must also expect that some readers will think: "This does not represent me or my interests. In fact, it represents my enemy." So is it any wonder that the offended or befuddled reader might consider everything else in the paper - including, say, campaign coverage - suspicious as well?"

Bingo! Elisabeth Bumillier might as well just reprint whatever the DNC talking point of the week is, her one-sidedness being so obvious.

[3] "Every one of these articles {in support of gay marriage} was perfectly legitimate. Cumulatively, though, they would make a very effective ad campaign for the gay marriage cause. You wouldn't even need the articles: run the headlines over the invariably sunny pictures of invariably happy people that ran with most of these pieces, and you'd have the makings of a life insurance commercial.

"This implicit advocacy is underscored by what hasn't appeared. Apart from one excursion into the legal ramifications of custody battles ("Split Gay Couples Face Custody Hurdles," by Adam Liptak and Pam Belluck, March 24), potentially nettlesome effects of gay marriage have been virtually absent from The Times since the issue exploded last winter."

Here Okrent discusses the reportage of the most emotional issue this campaign, namely gay marriage. Essentially, Okrent admits that the NYT didn't so much report gay marriage as advocate it, stump for it, cheerlead it. The newspaper couldn't even be bothered to reports cases of gay spousal abuse (rampant in lesbian relationships) or promiscuity or the divorce rates of those who entered civil unions from Vermont. He could cite only one NYT article slightly critical of gay marriage.

I save the most damning comment last:

[4] "On a topic that has produced one of the defining debates of our time, Times editors have failed to provide the three-dimensional perspective balanced journalism requires."

So, read the NYT if you wish to know the prejudices, diversions, and occasions of the wealthy Manhattanite, but don't read it for actual information purposes.

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Even if the New York Times is as liberal as this article makes it appear, this still isn't enough to balance the right-wing bias that afflicts the rest of the media.

[Akno21]

I might be inclined to believe the New York Times is liberal from what I have read in books by Ann Coulter and others. Except those books are filled with lies, so many of them that I have no reason to believe them.

NYT's editorials may lean a little bit liberal, but at least they aren't totally idiodic editorials, as those placed in the Wall Street Journal, which is a clearly conservative paper. Also, the readers of the NYT are most likely Liberals, and the paper has to sell. Any liberalness shown by the Times of New York is nothing compared to the Conservativeness shown by the Times of Washington.

The WT allows their mamager, a die-hard conservative Wes Pruden, to add in stuff to any article he chooses, yet keep it under the reporter's name. He frequently slanders liberals, but under names of reporters who haven't even at the event.  

[Jake]

bandit
How can you say the media has a right-wing bias?

NPR, CNN,  NBC, ABC, CBS

The LA Times, Washington Post, NY Times

Newsweek, Time, Moveon.org

Conservatives only control Fox News and Talk Radio

[Akno21]

bandit
How can you say the media has a right-wing bias?

NPR, CNN,  NBC, ABC, CBS

The LA Times, Washington Post, NY Times

Newsweek, Time, Moveon.org

Conservatives only control Fox News and Talk Radio

Moveon.org, duh. georgewbush.com is biased too.

How is Newsweek biased- George Will writes for him.

CNN is not baised, they are actually fair.

Conservatives also control the Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, etc. 58% of papers endorsed Bush last time. In 2000 56% of Gore stories were negative compared with only 49% for Bush.

[Keystone Phil]

bandit
How can you say the media has a right-wing bias?

NPR, CNN,  NBC, ABC, CBS

The LA Times, Washington Post, NY Times

Newsweek, Time, Moveon.org

Conservatives only control Fox News and Talk Radio

Hey another Pennsylvanian! Great to see you on the forum. Once you get 18 posts in, go to the Atlas Elections page and register your username as a Republican from PA.

[??????????]

Moveon.org should have its name changed to Sedition.org.

[Akno21]

Moveon.org should have its name changed to Sedition.org.

No, it's name is perfectly fine, and I am proud to say I have donated many dollars to the organization.

[??????????]

Moveon.org should have its name changed to Sedition.org.

No, it's name is perfectly fine, and I am proud to say I have donated many dollars to the organization.

Akno, did you know these nuts hate America?

[ATFFL]

bandit
How can you say the media has a right-wing bias?

NPR, CNN,  NBC, ABC, CBS

The LA Times, Washington Post, NY Times

Newsweek, Time, Moveon.org

Conservatives only control Fox News and Talk Radio

Moveon.org, duh. georgewbush.com is biased too.

How is Newsweek biased- George Will writes for him.

CNN is not baised, they are actually fair.

Conservatives also control the Wall Street Journal, Washington Times, etc. 58% of papers endorsed Bush last time. In 2000 56% of Gore stories were negative compared with only 49% for Bush.

http://essaysfromexodus.scripting.com/stories/storyReader$1991

Yeah, CNN is great.  Just ask two of Saddam's sons-in-law.  You're going to need a psychic to talk to them though, thanks to CNNs "reporting".

[Akno21]

Moveon.org should have its name changed to Sedition.org.

No, it's name is perfectly fine, and I am proud to say I have donated many dollars to the organization.

Akno, did you know these nuts hate America?

How the heck do they hate America? They are attempting to move it forward. They hate Bush. And don't bring up the Hitler/Bush ad. That was made by a independent group and submitted in an ad contest to Moveon.

[© tweed]

The partisan Democrat ombudsman of the New York Times fully admits the NYT is a very liberal paper whose ideology compromises its ability to report facts fairly.

IS this something we didn't already know?

[??????????]

Moveon.org should have its name changed to Sedition.org.

No, it's name is perfectly fine, and I am proud to say I have donated many dollars to the organization.

Akno, did you know these nuts hate America?

How the heck do they hate America? They are attempting to move it forward. They hate Bush. And don't bring up the Hitler/Bush ad. That was made by a independent group and submitted in an ad contest to Moveon.

And sites they link to claim that Bush knew about 9/11 or plotted it.

If www.rnc.org was linked to www.kkk.com would you be raising hell or saying, "The RNC has nothing to do with the KKK?"

[Akno21]

Moveon.org should have its name changed to Sedition.org.

No, it's name is perfectly fine, and I am proud to say I have donated many dollars to the organization.

Akno, did you know these nuts hate America?

How the heck do they hate America? They are attempting to move it forward. They hate Bush. And don't bring up the Hitler/Bush ad. That was made by a independent group and submitted in an ad contest to Moveon.

And sites they link to claim that Bush knew about 9/11 or plotted it.

If www.rnc.org was linked to www.kkk.com would you be raising hell or saying, "The RNC has nothing to do with the KKK?"

They link to liberal sites and some liberal sites have conspiracy theories. Big deal. It's not like Moveon links to www.killandlynchppl.com or www.bushissatan.com or something like that. If RNC directly was linked to the KKK website, I'd have some questions.

[??????????]

Moveon.org should have its name changed to Sedition.org.

No, it's name is perfectly fine, and I am proud to say I have donated many dollars to the organization.

Akno, did you know these nuts hate America?

How the heck do they hate America? They are attempting to move it forward. They hate Bush. And don't bring up the Hitler/Bush ad. That was made by a independent group and submitted in an ad contest to Moveon.

And sites they link to claim that Bush knew about 9/11 or plotted it.

If www.rnc.org was linked to www.kkk.com would you be raising hell or saying, "The RNC has nothing to do with the KKK?"

They link to liberal sites and some liberal sites have conspiracy theories. Big deal. It's not like Moveon links to www.killandlynchppl.com or www.bushissatan.com or something like that. If RNC directly was linked to the KKK website, I'd have some questions.

LOL LOL Click that link Bush is Satan!!!! It goes right to Moveon.org!!!! lol lol lol putz

[Bandit3 the Worker]

Not only do conservatives control Faux News Channel, the Washington Times, and talk radio, but also most of the newspapers in mid-sized cities, such as both newspapers in Cincinnati.

[MarkDel]

I might be inclined to believe the New York Times is liberal from what I have read in books by Ann Coulter and others. Except those books are filled with lies, so many of them that I have no reason to believe them.

NYT's editorials may lean a little bit liberal, but at least they aren't totally idiodic editorials, as those placed in the Wall Street Journal, which is a clearly conservative paper. Also, the readers of the NYT are most likely Liberals, and the paper has to sell. Any liberalness shown by the Times of New York is nothing compared to the Conservativeness shown by the Times of Washington.

The WT allows their mamager, a die-hard conservative Wes Pruden, to add in stuff to any article he chooses, yet keep it under the reporter's name. He frequently slanders liberals, but under names of reporters who haven't even at the event.  

Akno21,

Perhaps you would be good enough to post some of the "alleged lies" that Ann Coulter published in her book "Slander"

And if Coulter lied, I suppose Bernard Goldberg did as well?

[johngalt1234]

Has anyone read the book " The Fountainhead"....If you have you will be familiar with the character of Gail Wynand who owns a newspaper and publishes the trash that people want to hear and the only reason is because it is what sells the paper.

I see no difference in the media here. We have all the cute little stories about the sick little child getting his/her trip to Disney etc etc.... The real issues you have to dig on the Internet to get close to...

Lets talk some real issues here....

The 500 billion deficit for starters and the 6+trillion dollars debt.....who is gonna pay for it
the 500 billion dollars a year trade imbalance which effectively means we are exporting jobs. When you import more than you export the jobs are created overseas.
Is Government becoming bigger and bigger....does Kerry or Bush have any plans to scale it down....

It is long recognized that Political campaigns are not about the issues but creating a great fuzzy good feeling which rapidly turns to a sinking feeling after the election

[Storebought]

The partisan Democrat ombudsman of the New York Times fully admits the NYT is a very liberal paper whose ideology compromises its ability to report facts fairly.

IS this something we didn't already know?

Yes. Anyone who isn't a socialized partisan realizes that the NYT, far from its slogan as "America's Paper of Record," remains in fact a broadsheet of Manhattan provincialism.

The fact that the paper's public representative states the fact in so many words remains remarkable.

[Alfie]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

And we in Manhattan return the salutation, however misplaced; you see, it is the world to the east, west, north, and south of our island nation that is provincial.

The "slogan" of the NYT is, and has been since 1897, "All The News That's Fit To Print."  

Major newspapers, which is to say the LAT, NYT, WP, WSJ are complex organisms.  To say a newspaper is "liberal" may be imprecise at best. The NYT is liberal to middle-of-the-roaders, but hardly the stuff of radicalism.   And if it were a "liberal" paper, at least it struggles to find the truth, no matter how long that may take.  Can the same be said of the Washington Times?  The Daily News?

- Alfie


Vote John Kerry/Edwards: "America Knows Better"

[johngalt1234]

What is news fit to print? Who decides that?

It is essential that a newspaper or any media outlet not have a bias... and give coverage to all things that have a bearing on the consumer .

In todays world Media is there to shape the opinion of the public. so the bias of the editors is reflected in the material that is presented. It is no secret scandal sells, feel good stories make people feel good about themselves and so they would buy the paper.

Integrity in Journalism requires that all sides of an issue be presented to the consumer so that he can make up his/her mind based on objective fact.  In this election year third parties are not mentioned by the major media. Just because they are not mentioned doesnt mean they dont exist.

[Storebought]

Not only do conservatives control Faux News Channel, the Washington Times, and talk radio, but also most of the newspapers in mid-sized cities, such as both newspapers in Cincinnati.

How does conservative control of one media outlet imply conservative control over all media outlets?

And, in my medium-sized city, one very rich, very Democrat, family has owned the local newspaper and one TV station for decades.

And to the other poster, I am only elaborating the arguments made by the NYT's own public representative. Okrent's the one who said his paper is (1) wildly politically liberal, 'not that there's anything wrong with that' (2) extremely selective in its reportage (3) decidedly biased towards a wealthy Manhattanite's cultural outlook--at one point, Okrent even says that 'others' like Texans and evangelical Christians are analyzed like microbes on a slide, their culture being so alien to him and others at the NYT. I'm only the messenger.

[Akno21]

I might be inclined to believe the New York Times is liberal from what I have read in books by Ann Coulter and others. Except those books are filled with lies, so many of them that I have no reason to believe them.

NYT's editorials may lean a little bit liberal, but at least they aren't totally idiodic editorials, as those placed in the Wall Street Journal, which is a clearly conservative paper. Also, the readers of the NYT are most likely Liberals, and the paper has to sell. Any liberalness shown by the Times of New York is nothing compared to the Conservativeness shown by the Times of Washington.

The WT allows their mamager, a die-hard conservative Wes Pruden, to add in stuff to any article he chooses, yet keep it under the reporter's name. He frequently slanders liberals, but under names of reporters who haven't even at the event.  

Akno21,

Perhaps you would be good enough to post some of the "alleged lies" that Ann Coulter published in her book "Slander"

And if Coulter lied, I suppose Bernard Goldberg did as well?

I'd be honored:
Coulter says: "The day after Dale Earnhardt died during the Daytona 500, nearly every major newspaper mentioned it on the first page. It took the New York Times two days to deem Earnhardt's death sufficent enough to put on the front page"
He died Feb 18, 2001. On Feb. 19, 2001, it WAS on the front page- you can look it up.

She lied about her age, either in Connecticut or DC, because the ages on the liscenes are different.

She also says "Liberals hate America, Liberals hate society, and Liberal hate all religions except for Islam". Now, if that's not total BS, I don't know what is.

She says "For decades TNYT had allowed loose associations between Nazis and Christians to be made in its pages. Statements like Did Nazi Crimes draw on Christian tradition and the church is co-responsible for the Holocaust."

The first one was from a Times reviwer, Paul Berman, who was framing the question asked by the book, which was about a 400 year-old play in Bavaria that portrays Jews as hateful and evil. The 2nd is a quote of a quote from an article entitled "John Paul's Jewish Dilemma" The writer is quoting a critic of the Church.

I have more if you want them.