Op-ed views and opinions expressed are solely those of the author.
Despicable players rear their heads all during our journey through life. Sometimes they are people, other times they are entities such as institutions.
Here in the 21st century, one such political player has moved to the head of the line of Untrustworthies. No player deserves the Despicable Player of the Year award more than the poster-child promoter of Fake News, The New York Times.
And it’s not a stretch to make that claim.
Journalism has changed in America. The big transformation has been the shift of journalists to commentators while continuing to call themselves journalists. We are seeing this epidemic in both the print media and TV broadcasting, and especially at the Times. No such thing anymore as news reporters; they take the news and add their opinions, too many of which took root out in crazyland. These “journalists” love to stir the pot, keeping people at each other’s throats, manufacturing their own version of the news. Much of it is Fake News from anonymous sources, or one unverified source, or simply lies. The Times prints stories with little or no basis in fact, which helps the political left– stories that are made up by anonymous people, pushing harm. The Times twists the truth to fit their personal or corporate agendas, but denies that’s what they do.
The “journalists” at the Times cannot seem to see the world through anyone’s eyes but their own. They take sides. Examples abound: The Times usually runs smiling-face photos of their pet politician-darlings, no matter what the news is, but use grumpy/unflattering photos of their political enemies. They run editorials of their political positions, such as gun control, on the front page where the news is supposed to be. They put favored campaign ads, such as Hillary Clinton’s, on their website home page. The website also promotes editorials and columns by primarily liberal writers, and makes it “nearly impossible” to tell them apart, according to a Times ombudsman. Conservatives, who submit reader comments responding to political articles, find that their comments are deep-sixed by editors, often never getting printed.
Is the Times balanced? Well, you decide: the last Republican they endorsed for President was Eisenhower, 63 years ago. Or the Times’ extreme violation of journalistic ethics by publishing the uncorroborated “sexual-assault accusation against Supreme Court Justice Kavanaugh” when the “victim” doesn’t even remember the alleged incident. Even in the Times’ book reviews we see subjective bias, with reviewers stating that “our current president” is the equivalent of “real-life sinner” Richard Nixon. Reviewers take shots at Floridians out in the “provinces”, accusing us hayseeds of making readers “reach for shoddy, off-the-shelf solutions to your psychic unease”. Whatever that means.
Times writers throw their personal opinions into their news stories, like Mark Landler did when he opined that Attorney General Barr “acted more as a defense lawyer for Trump than as the leader of the Justice Department”– pure subjective bias in what was supposed to be a straight news story, trying to influence public opinion toward his personal beliefs.
When the Times prints Fake News, sometimes the reason it’s fake is because the article relied on news from other sources that was fake, a failure to verify.
The deeper problem with the Times is its hypocrisy. Giving one-sided news opinions is acceptable if you admit it’s your opinion. But the Times never admits it has a liberal bias, a leftist political agenda, and a progressive culture. Most conservative news sites admit they are presenting the news with a conservative flavor or interpretation. But it’s difficult to name any news sites on the left that admit they’re biased.
It’s sad, really. What had been the honorable profession of journalism has been prostituted, intellectually corrupted in many ways. And the American public has come to be convinced of this. The Gallup organization took a poll this year, giving respondents a list of institutions in American society, and asking how much confidence they had in each one. Only 23% said they had a “Great deal/Quite a lot” of confidence in newspapers. No surprise there, and no surprise that the Times deserves the Despicable Player of the Year award.
Latest posts by John R. Smith (see all)
- ‘Despicable Player of the Year’ – and the award goes to… - November 5, 2019
- Why wealth taxes will not work - October 29, 2019
- Who are these people who call themselves Democratic Socialists? - October 24, 2019