The New York Times: Party mouthpiece
Bookworm on Mar 06 2007 at 9:06 am | Filed under: Media matters
Let me open by saying that I know that the Hillary/Barack showdown is almost Hollywood perfect: she’s the constantly morphing, much hated, incredibly powerful and wealthy wife of a still loved ex-President; he’s the telegenic, deep voiced, wunderkind, with so little experience that he has no political dirt attached to him. What could make for better story telling? It’s unsurprising, therefore, that their combat ends up daily on the front page of The New York Times. Conservatives are also fascinated by the whole thing, and highlight it in their blogs.
But the New York Times is supposed to be a newspaper, not a Hollywood movie or a story-telling hour. That’s why I find it a little surprising that, when I check its front page on a daily basis, it has so much about Hillary/Barack (especially “above the fold”), and so little about McCain/Romney/Guiliani. I freely acknowledge that the latter three are fairly boring compared to the shootout in the Democratic candidate corral, but they’re still news. Or, at least, they’re news to Republicans and that, ultimately, may be why they don’t show up in the New York Times, which is increasingly making less effort to pretend that it caters to all, rather than just to Democratic readers.
del.icio.us
digg it
Email This Post To A Friend
9 Responses to “The New York Times: Party mouthpiece”
Leave a Reply
You must be logged in to post a comment.
Their news is straight down the middle, book, straight down the middle. Well that’s what Bill Keller says at least.
Right on the nose!
I had to stop weekly delivery for the DNC rag this formerly excellent paper has become. It is a shame really as I still think it has a lot of good news reported in it.
I am enjoying WSJ much more these days, but i suppose this is a command of the obvious for independent thinkers.
I loved your piece at American Thinker. I plan to add you to my blogroll.
Thanks very much for the excellent post.
Joe
This illustrates why we Home School our children.
The behind the scenes work is what I do daily without the intrusion of the public school factory
Paparon
my my my what EVIDENCE you mount,dear, in demonstrating the MSM complicity in liberal brainwashing of our sweet land. The thing that causes me gaseous dischages is how FOX IS PART OF IT. Oh god no, you say, it’s not true, but it is. You see, if one searches the name Barack on the Fox News site, you get more of those “hits” than if you search Romney or Giuliani (don’t forget to watch your spellings on those pesky foreign names!). You tell me, is Fox News a mouthpiece of that horrid liberal lying!!!? I’m thinking they are.
That would make the media all the way to the left.
BW, You have better control than I when it comes to the NYT. Just looking at their headlines raises my blood pressure. I refuse to give them my money or time. And why bother? If it does appear in the NYT, the probability of it being accurate is maybe 50%
Al
Well, let’s look at the record -the NYT actively tried to undermine US efforts in WWI; made goo-goo eyes over Stalin while whitewashing is mass starvation of the Ukrainians (Pulitzer prize!); swooned over Castro as a human reformist; pronounced over and over again the superiority of the Soviet economic system; actively undermined American efforts in S.E. Asia while sagely proclaiming that the Khmer Rouge would bring peace to Cambodia; covered for Billy Clinton’s sexual predations; established an anti-American confluence of interests with Islamic Jihadis; and gleefully disclosed U.S. intelligence secrets to the world, helping to ensure that other countries’ intelligence services would have to be absolutely out of their minds to cooperate with the U.S.
So, why exactly is it that the NYT’s world view needs to be taken seriously?
Here’s my recommendation, Book. If you want to read the NYT editorial page, send $10 to the DNC and they will deliver it to you at no additional charge. Other NYT news can be had through AP feeds, to be found in any paper.
That was a rant, by the way!
Don’t forget the Civil War, Danny. They were spies for the Confeds there as well. Pro-slavery dontcha know. Consistent record for the fake liberal “flagship” rag.