In his column in Tuesday's Washington Examiner, Byron York, who in a Friday blog post recounted “The Van Jones (non) feeding frenzy,” asked: “Why did the press ignore the Van Jones scandal?” The chief political correspondent for the paper answered: “The question may not be so much who they are, as who they hate, or at least who they intensely dislike.” York pointed out:
The first words of the [New York] Times' story on Jones' resignation were, “In a victory for Republicans and the Obama administration's conservative critics....” One news anchor suggested Jones was “the Republican right's first scalp.” Other coverage called the Jones affair a victory for Glenn Beck, Fox News, right-wing blogs, and even Sarah Palin, who played no role in the matter. If you throw in Rush Limbaugh, you have all the bogey-people of the conservative world. To some on the left, including some journalists, denying them a victory was a top priority, no matter what Van Jones had said and done.
On the up side: “There was a day, not too long ago, when the Times and other influential news organizations could kill a story -- could deny the bad guys a win -- simply by ignoring it. Sometimes they still try. But it just won't work anymore.”
York began his September 8 column by recalling how the New York Times suppressed another storyline unpleasant to Barack Obama:
On March 13, 2008, ABC News broke the story that Barack Obama's longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, had made a number of incendiary statements from the pulpit of Obama's church in Chicago. The most inflammatory of those remarks was Wright's notorious "God damn America" sermon.The news set off a media firestorm. "God damn America" was in the papers, magazines, the Internet, television, radio. It was everywhere, except one place: the news pages of America's most powerful newspaper, the New York Times. In the days, weeks, and months following the ABC report, the Times' news pages repeatedly failed to inform its readers that Wright had ever uttered those infamous words.
The quote did find its way into a few columns and a (pro-Obama) editorial. But in the news pages -- the ones which report "All the news that's fit to print" -- months went by with no word of "God damn America." It was not until Sept. 24, 2008, six months after the story originally broke, that an article in the Times -- it was about anti-Obama political ads -- reported Wright's notorious words. For half a year, the paper's editors simply ignored a key portion of one of the biggest stories of the presidential campaign.
Now, the Times has failed to report another story, this time one that led to the resignation of a White House official much loved by many on the left, "green jobs" czar Van Jones....
Full rundown of the lack of Jones coverage and what the networks covered instead.
—Brent Baker is Vice President for Research and Publications at the Media Research Center
Editor at Large
Comments Policy
“There was a day, not too
September 9, 2009 - 08:45 ET by motherbelt“There was a day, not too long ago, when the Times and
other influential news organizations could kill a story -- could deny
the bad guys a win -- simply by ignoring it. Sometimes they still try.
But it just won't work anymore.”
And when and the opposition succeeds and the have to cover it, they will play it as right-wing spite, rather than a legitimate objection on the merits.
...But it just won't work anymore.”
September 9, 2009 - 08:47 ET by vrwc13...thanks to NB, Drudge, Beck, Rush, et al.
v
"the Times, they are
September 9, 2009 - 09:06 ET by HockeyKid"the Times, they are a-changin'..." ;)
"Beauty is only skin deep, but liberal's to the bone." - me
I was reading
September 9, 2009 - 08:47 ET by Tugboat Phila story on another website. It used the NYT, CNN, USA Today and NBC News as supporting sources. I thought to myself that they couldn't have picked better sources for me to NOT believe their story.
The only people who seem to be under the spell of the dinosaurs as being credible news outlets are folks like, God bless her, my Mom. She still thinks FDR is in office, Huntley & Brinkley are on the evening news and Democrats are "for the little guy."
"I am sick and tired of people who say that if you debate and disagree with this administration somehow you're not patriotic. We should stand up and say we are Americans and we have a right to debate and disagree with any administration!" H.R. Clinton
Does anybody care?
September 9, 2009 - 08:49 ET by 10ksnookerWhat dead dinosaurs think about anything. Maybe that's why they are dead and just don't know it.
Other coverage called the
September 9, 2009 - 08:52 ET by NewsbusterbrownOther coverage called the Jones affair a victory for Glenn Beck, Fox
News, right-wing blogs, and even Sarah Palin, who played no role in the
matter. If you throw in Rush Limbaugh, you have all the bogey-people of
the conservative world.
You forgot Dick "Darth Vader" Cheney, Byron. :-)
Great article!
“There are no easy answers' but there are simple answers. We must have the courage to do what we know is morally right.” - Ronald Reagan (1964 Republican Convention)
Control
September 9, 2009 - 08:53 ET by KC MulvilleThese premises only hold if you don't know what's going on.
In the past, we suspected the mainstream media of withholding information or stories because of an ideological agenda. Since the public wouldn't know the difference, the media had the luxury of controlling public opinion simply by selective reporting. Now, since we're getting information from several sources, that luxury is gone. Lo and behold, we're discovering many places where the mainstream media has been selectively reporting from only one point of view.
This non-story ... along with the constant branding of scandals when Republican but not Democrat, destroying GOP candidates over macaca but ignoring Demorcat whoppers wholesale, and much more ... are evidence against the mainstream media.
And my oh my, are they angry about it!
If only...
September 9, 2009 - 09:10 ET by Bingo...this remarkable new media had been there when it was needed most...the late 60's. Can you imagine how American history might have been re-written?
BTW ... Byron York ... YOU RULE !
"On March 13, 2008, ABC
September 9, 2009 - 09:23 ET by ninerdog"On March 13, 2008, ABC News broke the story that Barack Obama's longtime pastor, the Rev. Jeremiah Wright, had made a number of incendiary statements from the pulpit of Obama's church in Chicago. The most inflammatory of those remarks was Wright's notorious "God damn America" sermon."
That was what a year and a half after Hanity "broke" this. Quick on the up take over there on ABC.
NYT
September 9, 2009 - 09:25 ET by John Galt1776York began his September 8 column by recalling how the New York Times suppressed another storyline unpleasant to Barack Obama:
========
Indeed but they also suppressed this story
BORN IN THE USA?
Shocker! Judge orders trial on eligibility issue
Arguments planned Jan. 11 for major Obama challenge
Posted: September 08, 2009
4:42 pm Eastern
By Jerome R. Corsi
© 2009 WorldNetDaily
A California judge today tentatively scheduled a trial for Jan.
26, 2010, for a case that challenges Barack Obama's eligibility to be
president based on questions over his qualifications under the
requirements of the U.S. Constitution.
If the case actually goes to arguments before U.S. District
Judge David Carter, it will be the first time the merits of the dispute
have been argued in open court, according to one of the attorneys
working on the issue.
In a highly anticipated hearing today before Carter, several
motions were heard, including a resolution to long-standing questions
about whether attorney Orly Taitz properly served notice on the
defendants, which she had.
In a second ruling, Carter ordered that attorney Gary Kreep of the United States Justice Foundation
can be added to the case to represent plaintiffs Wiley Drake and
Markham Robinson, who had been removed by an earlier court order.
Drake, the vice presidential candidate for the American Independent
Party, and Robinson, the party's chairman, also were restored to the
case.
http://www.wnd.com/i...
September 9, 2009 - 09:38 ET by jessieHJournalists? The only place I see journalists is on Fox News. The rest have become paid hacks. I have lost all respect for "journalists". All the news thats print to fit is more like it.
The SCM are co-conspirators in this coup
September 9, 2009 - 10:07 ET by R D HelmThey know exactly what Obama is really doing to America, and they support him in this effort 100%.
The traitorous swine aren't about to report ANYTHING that might possibly slow or derail this country's transformation into a communist rat hole like Cuba.
-Dave
Even when the government tries to kiss you, it is just a prelude to a good screwing. -Neal Boortz
I'll miss reading the Sports page
September 9, 2009 - 11:36 ET by sic721If the NY Times really is "America's most powerful newspaper", all I have to say to that is bye bye print media, and with few exceptions, good riddance.
"Life's tough.....It's even tougher if you're stupid"-John Wayne
Byron York is 100% Wrong
September 9, 2009 - 13:28 ET by cjbreischThe MSM didn't avoid the Van Jones story because they hate conservatives.
They also didn't avoid the story because they were trying to help Obama.
The reason is far simipler than either of these.
The MSM did not report on Van Jones' statements and his past, because they didn't think there was anything newsworthy there.
Van Jones never said or did anything that the MSM finds remotely objectionable. They also don't understand why anyone other than a right-wing fanatic would feel otherwise.
It's not a case of a cover-up for protection, or for hatred. It's just another example of how they're completely out of touch.
The MSM has reached its shrill point. All they have now is the
September 9, 2009 - 15:28 ET by pahuberlil' minions on KOS, DU & even some of their own are on this site to try and help them with what they consider 'tactics' to divert & blame, divide & conquer or even point out a few incidences of 'bad behavior'.
Mind you, they will not have proof, evidence, intellectual honesty, but it will be entertaining...
: ) just don't let them under your skin.