New York Times reporter Trip Gabriel, covering the Gingrich campaign, inflated conventional pro-Israel, anti-"peace process" opinions delivered by Newt Gingrich into a diplomatic drama about Gingrich scrapping the two-state solution worthy of "damage control," in Saturday’s “Gingrich Suggests a Reversal of Mideast Policy.”
The New York Times devoted a front-page story Monday to casting doubt on a theoretical nuclear threat publicized (among his many, many other ideas) by Newt Gingrich -- what scientists call electromagnetic pulse (EMP), a burst of electromagnetic radiation released by a nuclear explosion that could damage or destroy electrical service. Science reporter William Broad filed “Among Gingrich’s Passions, a Doomsday Vision.”
Some of the worst bias from the New York Times over the past month:
Surging GOPers “Are to Varying Degrees Yahoos”
“The candidates who surged before [Gingrich] are to varying degrees yahoos. They proved it anew last week. Michele Bachmann seemed to be under the impression that we had an embassy in Iran, and Rick Perry was definitely under the delusion that the voting age in this country is 21 instead of 18.” – Former White House correspondent, now columnist Frank Bruni, December 4.
Herman Cain “Seems Like Someone Who ...Has Never Opened a Newspaper”
“Let us pause here to make a necessarily severe assessment: to say that Herman Cain has an imperfect grasp of policy would be unfair not only to George W. Bush in 1999 but also to Britney Spears in 1999. Herman Cain seems like someone who, quite frankly, has never opened a newspaper.” –T.A. Frank in the November 13 edition of the Times Sunday Magazine.
The Obama administration blocked over-the-counter sales of Plan B One-Step, the “morning-after” pill, to girls under 17, and New York Times reporters Jackie Calmes (pictured) and Gardiner Harris sniffed out a political move to assuage “conservatives" in Friday’s “Obama Backs Aide’s Stance on Morning-After Pill.”
While the Times mentioned “conservatives” four times in discussing the surprise decision by Kathleen Sebelius, secretary for Health and Human Services, there were zero “liberals” labeled in opposition, merely “women’s rights” groups -- as if all women would favor the sale. And while "anti-abortion groups" were identified, there were no "pro-abortion" or even "pro-choice" groups on the other side, merely harmless "reproductive rights groups."
New York Times reporter Richard Oppel Jr. twice used the term “trickle-down economics” (without the quote marks) in Thursday’s dispatch from the Republican Jewish Coalition Forum in D.C., where several Republican candidates made speeches: “G.O.P. Candidates, at Jewish Coalition, Pledge to Be Israel’s Best Friends.”
“Trickle-down economics” is a derogatory term for the Reaganesque idea that tax cuts for the rich encourage investment, leading to economic growth that benefit everyone. It’s a favorite of Times columnist Paul Krugman and liberals in general, but the Times has generally refrained from using the term as a straight description in news stories. But Oppel did it twice, with no quote marks around the phrase to show that it’s not actually a neutral journalistic description, but a liberal Democratic interpretation of conservative policy. In contrast, the Times invariably places conservative catch-phrases like "death tax" in protective quotation marks, so that readers get the hint that it's just partisan rhetoric.
Thursday’s New York Times front-page campaign story by Jeff Zeleny and Jim Rutenberg prominently featured Obama campaign advisor David Axelrod frankly discussing how the party plans to influence the GOP primary by pitting Newt Gingrich (himself a "juicy target") against Mitt Romney: “Democrats See 2-Horse Race, Adding Whip.” It’s the kind of early White House attacks the Times once disapproved of, at least when done by Republican President George W. Bush.
New York Times reporter Stephanie Strom, who tracks foundation and charitable giving for the Times, gushed over George Soros in a story Wednesday on the new leader of “his unconventional philanthropic empire”: “Criminal Justice Expert Expected to Lead Soros Foundations.”
Through his Open Society Institute, Soros has invested heavily in left-wing groups Moveon.org and the Center for American Progress. Although his philanthropy and fierce rhetoric and political activism clearly mark the billionaire moneyman on the left, Strom is averse to putting an ideological label on Soros in her coverage.
First it was the “99 percent” slogan that captured the imagination of liberals, including New York Times journalists. Now it’s the “Robin Hood tax, which is “beginning to capture the public’s imagination.” The liberal public, at least. Times reporters Steven Greenhouse and Graham Bowley promoted “The Robin Hood Tax -- Support Grows for a Levy on Stock Trades to Help the World’s Poor” on the front of Monday’s Business section, while emphasizing it would be “tiny” and was driven by “populist,” not left-wing or liberal, anger.
New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter may have let his personal views color his enthusiastic reception of the popularity of Occupy Wall Street’s “99 percent” motif, but he was right that it is cropping up in a lot of places these days, especially among liberal activists. It has certainly sunken into the collective consciousness of New York Times journalists.
One prominent example: The front page of Monday’s Times featured a story by William Broad on affluent tourists taking trips on a mini submarine for a view of the Titanic, “Plunging Deep (in Pockets) to See Titanic at 100.”
After a stint as a White House reporter for the Times after George W. Bush took office in 2001, Frank Bruni wrote a fairly respectful biography of the president, Ambling Into History. But as a recently minted Times columnist, Bruni has betrayed no similar feeling for the current Republican candidates, who “are to varying degrees yahoos," according to his mocking Sunday Review column "And Now ... Professor Gingrich."
Saturday’s lead New York Times story by economics reporter Catherine Rampell found some hope for President Obama: “Jobless Rate Dips To Lowest Level For Last 2 Years – Unemployment at 8.6% – Boost for White House as Economy Shows Some Resilience.”
The economic news also led the Washington Post on Saturday, but its deck of headlines was less optimistic than that of the Times, putting the caveats in the headline instead of in paragraph five as the Times did: “Jobless rate falls to 8.6 percent – 120,000 added to payrolls in Nov. Drop also reflects that many quit seeking work."
The NYT’s Rampell trumpeted the “good news for President Obama.”
The New York Times “Caucus” podcast recorded December 1 featured reporter and podcast host Sam Roberts wondering if it was a potentially dangerous tactic” for GOP candidates to insult the Occupy Wall Street movement. This exchange came a minute and a half from the end, after Roberts asked how the Occupy movement’s “99%” slogan was playing out in the Republican primary.
Times Watch for June 22, 2004
Times Watch for November 6, 2003
Times Watch for October 22, 2003
Times Watch for July 31, 2003
In Friday’s lead New York Times story, White House correspondent Jackie Calmes again finds the Democrats with political momentum on the policy front, as she has, wrongly, on several occasions in the past, shown by the headline over her optimistic April 2 story, “Jobs Growth Could Stump Obama’s Critics.” (Nope.) This time, it’s Democrats allegedly putting the GOP in a “political bind” over cutting the payroll tax, due to the stubborn refusal by Republicans to raise taxes on "the rich."
Here’s the full headline deck to Friday’s lead story: “Democrats Look To Payroll issue For Upper Hand – Seek Extension of Cuts – Hoping to Paint G.O.P. as Favoring Wealthy – Two Bills Fail."
New York Times reporter Helene Cooper spread pro-Democratic optimism in Arizona, a state Barack Obama wasn't competitive in in 2008, thanks to the GOP's "hard-line stance" on immigration, in Friday’s “Arizona Sees a Boom In Voting-Age Hispanics – Democrats Sense Opportunity for Obama.”
On Thursday’s front page, New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter produced another homage to Occupy Wall Street, this time their slogan:“Camps Are Cleared, but ‘99 Percent’ Still Occupies the Lexicon.”(Thanks in no small part to fawning reporters like Stelter and others at the Times.) Part of his evidence? Google searches and an opposition blog that had not been updated in two whole weeks.
Ira Stoll dissected the New York Times’ s latest outburst of “sheer hypocrisy masquerading as journalism,” a Sunday front-page attack on the tax-shelter practices of Ronald Lauder, in a Monday post at the New York Sun website -- “Owners of New York Times Used Tax Loopholes the Paper Scored Ambassador Lauder for Using.”
A decade ago Stoll established Smarter Times, an influential blog of New York Times criticism, before becoming editor of the right-of-center newspaper The New York Sun. The Sun is only an online product now, but Stoll is keeping his hand in Times criticism. In his latest post, Stoll summarized the philanthropic work of Lauder, wealthy heir to the Estee Lauder fortune, then noted how: