Has The New York Times finally acknowledged that modern “journalism” is oftentimes nothing but commentary — left-wing commentary, usually — disguised as objective analysis?
Probably not, though an attempt was certainly made.
Flashback to Monday, when the Times published a piece titled, “‘No One Believes Anything’: Voters Worn Out by a Fog of Political News.”
In the ostensible analysis piece, the paper lamented that the American people are tuning out political news because of their inability to discern what’s true and what’s false.
“In this volatile political moment, information, it would seem, has never been more crucial,” the piece read. “The country is in the midst of impeachment proceedings against a president for the third time in modern history. A high-stakes election is less than a year away.”
“But just when information is needed most, to many Americans it feels most elusive. The rise of social media; the proliferation of information online, including news designed to deceive; and a flood of partisan news are leading to a general exhaustion with news itself.”
Devastating headline for Democrats:
? ‘No One Believes Anything’: Voters Worn Out by a Fog of Political News ?
From collusion to obstruction of justice to abuse of power to quid pro quo to bribery/extortion, Democrats have cried ‘wolf’ too many times. https://t.co/aD7SSdbMdD
— Rep Andy Biggs (@RepAndyBiggsAZ) November 18, 2019
What’s unclear is what the Times defines as “news designed to deceive” and “partisan news.” The definition is highly pertinent, given as it can easily be argued that the left-wing paper has itself frequently shared “news designed to deceive” and “partisan news.”
Consider the report it ran Sunday in which its “reporters” and “journalists” accused FedEx of benefiting lavishly from President Donald Trump’s tax laws but then turning around and hoarding that money instead of investing it.
In a statement posted late Sunday, the multinational courier delivery services company claimed the Times’ report was fake news:
— Bryan Beal ? (@bryanrbeal) November 18, 2019
Why did the Times run the piece? Likely to argue that the president’s tax reform bill was nothing but a “windfall to corporations like FedEx is becoming clear.”
But why would the Times attempt to convey such a point in an ostensible report? Because of the left-wing bias that it boasts but has tried unsuccessfully for years to hide.
The bias shows in the stories the Times chooses to share (and ignore), the narratives it purposefully chooses to pursue and the editorialized headlines it invariably writes.
Improved NYT headline pic.twitter.com/5Cx26e0AXc
— Michael Calderone (@mlcalderone) April 5, 2017
Of course, the Times didn’t talk about its own bias, partisanship and fake news in its report. Instead, it talked about the president:
“Then there are the politicians themselves, first among them Mr. Trump, who has helped create the confusion by asserting, over and over, things that numerous media fact-checkers say are not true,” the paper alleged.
But who fact-checks the fact-checkers, particularly when the so-called fact-checkers — including the “fact-checkers” at the Times — decide to fact-check a joke?
There is simply no way to take the media seriously when they fact-check obvious jokes. No one thinks Trump actually gave a medal to a dog. No one actually thinks Allie Stuckey interviewed AOC. No one actually believes the Babylon Bee is non-satire. https://t.co/2hFfkpBwC6
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) October 31, 2019
The Times even threw in a dictator/authoritarian leader reference, as usual.
“They spread this sense that people live in a world of endless conspiracy, and the truth is unknowable, and all that’s left in this confusing world is me,” Peter Pomerantsev, the author of “This is Not Propaganda: Adventures in the War Against Reality,” said to the paper about the world’s known dictators.
And then came the editorializing: “He was referring to Russian President Vladimir Putin and other authoritarian rulers. Mr. Trump, he said, has that style too.”
To be clear, the Times wasn’t wrong to address legitimate concerns about the public tuning out the news. Moreover, it deserves credit for citing some of the conservative perspective on the matter.
For instance, the paper spoke with Idaho computer programmer Russell Memory, a conservative who admits to being driven crazy by some of the president’s rhetoric and behavior, but who does appear to see eye-to-eye with him regarding the media.
“[H]e sees bias among liberal news outlets and that drives him crazy too,” the Times reported. “He was annoyed, for example, that stories of Mr. Trump being booed at the Washington Nationals baseball game were given top billing, but when Mr. Trump was cheered in Alabama a few days later, he could find almost nothing about it.”
FYI, BizPac Review, which openly identifies as a conservative news publisher, reported both.
“I don’t think things are fake, they’re just one-sided,” he said. “Both things happened. He got booed and he got cheered. But one of them will be a much bigger story. That’s what bothers me.”
The problem with the Times’ report is simply that, in covering the matter, the paper’s reporters abstained from casting any introspective scrutiny on themselves.
It’s as if they think everybody else is to blame but them. And well, sorry, but the facts strongly, strongly, strongly, strongly, strongly suggest otherwise.
Cases in point:
- Fiona Hill: ‘Open civil war’ possible if Trump elected in 2024 because Dems will see win as ‘illegitimate’ - October 24, 2021
- Pelosi refuses to confirm reelection in ’22, assures Jake Tapper ‘we’re pretty much there’ on massive spending bill - October 24, 2021
- ‘You’re a clown’: Chris Wallace dragged after calling Jen Psaki ‘one of the best press secretaries ever’ - October 24, 2021