The New York Times Has No Clothes

I have written in the past about the extreme liberal bias in what was once called the mainstream media. Based on the plummeting circulation of rags like the New York Times and Washington Post, I would posit that they are not nearly as “mainstream” as they once were, but the MSM moniker seems to have stuck. I’m not sure where the inflection point happened, but I think it is safe to say that papers like the NYT and WaPo and TV stations like CNN ceased being serious news outlets at least 20 years ago and probably longer.

What I am now finding hysterical is that the left, especially the Jewish left, has suddenly discovered the fact that the New York Times is a multi-section Op-Ed publication and nothing more. I received an e-mail from a dear friend from college (very liberal and Jewish) addressed to “My Republican Friends” informing us that she was considering dropping her lifetime subscription to the NYT. While I eschew the  title of Republican (I’m not one), I was amused by the e-mail.

Today, another Jewish friend (I think once liberal, now perhaps seeing the light a bit; maybe even voted for Romney) sent me a link to an article wherein long-time NYT subscriber, Nina Kampler, publicly announced her intent to divorce the paper over her perception that they are highly biased in their coverage of the current conflict in the Middle East.* With some melancholy in her tone, her divorce decree includes this:

“And, while I admit that I will miss you terribly and that no other newspaper can fill the void your departure will create, I prefer to engage in social intercourse with those whose who make me feel safe. You may think that there are a lot of other people out there prepared to give you a shot, but the educated balanced resourceful population is no longer buying your words.”

And with that, please let me welcome Nina Kampler to the ranks of the educated balanced resourceful population. It is great to have you.

I must say that watching liberals suddenly discover what a colossal piece of shit the NYT is and has been for decades is nothing short of hysterical. The gnashing of teeth and colorful articles like this one are fun to watch.

Folks, the NYT hasn’t reported the news in an even remotely unbiased way on any subject in 20 years. Perhaps longer. All that has changed for liberals is that their venerable rag has crossed swords with them because they happened to stumble into a more traditionally conservative opinion on Middle Eastern politics. Or, perhaps more accurately, the NYT has staked out a position so far to the left there’s just nobody out there to agree with them. When all the front page, above the fold op-ed articles masquerading as news were in agreement with all their other liberal orthodoxy, they never noticed. They were perfectly happy to remain in the ranks of the uneducated unbalanced and non-resourceful population. But the coverage of Israel has revealed to them that indeed the Emperor NYT is buck naked.


*I want to be super clear that this post is not intended to evaluate the fairness of the NYT’s coverage of the Middle Eastern conflict. I have not read a single article about it in that publication. I am speaking only to the reactions of liberals to their once-beloved publication that THEY perceive has been biased in its coverage.

About Bruce Robertson

Bruce Robertson is an amateur writer and professional provocateur
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

1 Response to The New York Times Has No Clothes

  1. sproulelove says:

    OK, after a two year hiatus, I’ll take the bait again. At the risk of giving you more ammunition for your stance on climate change (remember: it’s the uncertainty we’re worried about), here’s an example of probably the most credible journalist on the “climate science is not settled” side of the fence characterizing as “pretty fair” the recent NY Times profile of probably the highest-profile scientist on the same side of the fence:

    I commend you again for putting out an articulate, witty blog in a sea of dreck, but your tone (I’m reminded of your “I’m the guy who cuts in front of you at the off ramp” post) and contradictions like the one in the asterisked post script here hurt your case. These two sentences do not belong in the same post:

    “Folks, the NYT hasn’t reported the news in an even remotely unbiased way on any subject in 20 years.”
    “I want to be super clear that this post is not intended to evaluate the fairness of the NYT’s coverage of the Middle Eastern conflict.”

    Yes, picking nits, and yes, we disagree on what “fair and balanced” should mean. Just for kicks…is there a newspaper out there that you think is better?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s