Skip to main content

Hot Topics

Obama's 'Political Victory' Lead Story in NYTimes; His 'Major Setback' Set Back on A13

By Clay Waters | October 14, 2011 | 14:55

 A  A

Double standards on story placement in the New York Times? A “Political Victory” for the White House over trade deals that promise only “small” economic benefits was trumpeted in the headline to Thursday’s lead story, while a “major setback” for Obama and his jobs bill was buried on Wednesday’s inside pages.

The stack of headlines over Thursday’s lead story by Binyamin Appelbaum and Jennifer Steinhauer trumpeted a “Political Victory” for the White House in three trade deals involving South Korea, Colombia, and Panama, though the reporters themselves admitted “The economic benefits are projected to be small.” The headlines: “Trade Deals Pass Congress, Ending 5-Year Standoff – Support Is Bipartisan – Accords With 3 Nations Give Political Victory to White House.” How did the Times determine this story of "small" benefits was the most important news of the day?

Another internal contradiction was caught by James Taranto in his “Best of the Web” column. Was the vote bipartisan or not?

"Congress passed three long-awaited free trade agreements on Wednesday, ending a political standoff that has stretched across two presidencies. The move offered a rare moment of bipartisan accord at a time when Republicans and Democrats are bitterly divided over the role that government ought to play in reviving the sputtering economy."--first paragraph news story, New York Times, Oct. 13

"The votes reflected a clear partisan divide, with many Democrats voting against the president."--fifth paragraph, same story

Story Continues Below Ad ↓

Meanwhile, a story on Wednesday by Robert Pear that confessed Obama suffered a “major setback” when his latest jobs bill failed on a vote in the Senate was shoved back onto page A13. The president’s proposal was greeted with huzzahs by White House reporter Jackie Calmes when it was introduced in September. Calmes warned Republicans that they “could lose the House” if they stand in the way of it. Well, they stood in the way of it, killing it – and Obama’s “major setback” made page 13.
 

About the Author

Clay Waters is the director of Times Watch, an MRC project tracking the New York Times. Click here to follow Clay Waters on Twitter.
Stop Censoring The Gosnell Trial!

Comments

Gee who controlled congress

Submitted by eaglewingz08 on Fri, 10/14/2011 - 3:12pm.

Gee who controlled congress from 2006 (five years ago) to 2010? The democraps. So, the democraps stall this bill for 5 years, and the only reason it gets to Congress is because Republicans strongly demand the trade bills be voted on, and Obama capitulates against the advice of his union puppeteers.

If Bush had won on Colombia Trade Bill, in 2007-08 . .

Submitted by Gary Hall on Fri, 10/14/2011 - 3:58pm.

If Bush had won on Colombia Trade Bill, in 2007-08 . . I'd expect that our national media, rather then showcasing it as a win for the Bush administration, would have broadcast it as a looser for the US. Why? The left, with some exceptions, always opposed it. A few bits from back then:

  • Analysts say the fate of a free-trade pact now hangs on how hard Bush is willing to fight for it. In the third presidential debate, Obama expressed reservations about the bill, citing human rights concerns. (Sorry didn't save the link, on this one.)

From the Democratic Underground (April, 08):

  • Way to go Nancy! [..]
  • President Bush said yesterday that a trade agreement with Colombia is "dead" unless House Democrats agree to hold a vote on the pact, effectively admitting defeat on a White House priority.
  • After meeting with his Cabinet, Bush lashed out at House Speaker Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) for putting off a vote on the free-trade pact, which the administration views as important for U.S. national security and the economy. "This free-trade agreement is in our national interests," Bush said. "Yet that bill is dead unless the speaker schedules a definite vote."
  • Pelosi fired back by accusing Bush of being "out of touch" with the "concerns of America's working families." She said the House will take no action on the Colombia pact until it considers other legislation aimed at aiding the U.S. economy.

(;~/ gary

Thank you Gary for dredging

Submitted by needle on Fri, 10/14/2011 - 10:51pm.

Thank you Gary for dredging the Democratic Underground; that was interesting.

Contrary to my principles, I went and read the NYT account of the trade bill passage to find out how "in-touch" Nancy Pelosi voted. The article never mentions Pelosi; but interestingly it does say “Senator Harry Reid of Nevada, the majority leader, voted against all three measures.” So we at least see how in touch he is. I wonder how many Nevadans have buyers remorse , if any.

- Looking forward to the self-annihilation of the Manipulated Stories Machine.

Hope you used antiseptic wipes and antibiotics....

Submitted by drsamherman on Fri, 10/14/2011 - 10:55pm.

...after dredging into that cesspool over at dumbocratunderground. You are a brave man for even looking at that site. It has been documented to induce violence directed at computer monitors and acute alcohol ingestion on the part of conservatives!

How interesting...

Submitted by CobraMan on Fri, 10/14/2011 - 4:39pm.

How interesting. It's a "political victory" that we have free trade agreements with countries were we also had, and still have, military interventions. Way to go, Obama! Where's Code Pink when we need them?

The Citizens of each State shall be entitled to all Privileges and Immunities of Citizens in the several States. The US Constitution

Unless you're a fetus. The US Supreme Court

Or Anwar al-Awlaki.

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.