TimesWatch

New York Times reporter J. David Goodman interviewed an Occupy Wall Street attendee with a shameful past for the Tuesday metro section -- “A Regular at the Protests With an Unspoken Past: Wall St. Made Him Rich.”

Robert Halper is a retired Wall Street trader and the top single donor to the Canadian “anticorporate” magazine Adbusters, credited with launching the leftist sit-in. But Goodman didn’t mention the magazine’s incendiary anti-Israel past, like the paper’s notorious 2004 attack on neo-conservatives, “Why Won’t Anyone Say They Are Jewish?”

New York Times reporters Jennifer Steinhauer and Steven Yaccino unfurled a hit piece (accompanied by a severely unflattering photo) on Rep. Joe Walsh of Illinois, conservative freshman congressman and Tea Party favorite, on the front of Tuesday’s National section: “G.O.P.’s Freshman’s Fiscal Message Clashes With His Finances.” It’s not the first time the paper has gone after a Tea Party conservative on such personal terms.

The romantic treatment of the leftist sit-in at Wall Street by Michael Kimmelman in his Sunday Review “news analysis” “The Power of Place in Protest" was bad enough, with talk of Aristotle and “the size of an ideal polis” and how “Zuccotti Park has in fact become a miniature polis, a little city in the making.” But the real offense came in the New York Times's choice of comparison photos.

The think-piece by the paper's architectural critic was accompanied by archive photos of other massive legendary protests; Kent State in 1970; the Central Park protest against the Vietnam War in 1967; the famous man in front of the tank in Tiananmen Square in 1989; the fall of the Berlin Wall that same year. Of more recent vintage was the Tahrir Square protest in Cairo and Occupy Wall Street.

Political reporter Matt Bai’s 7,000-word cover story for the New York Times Sunday Magazine, “‘ESTABLISHMENT REPUBLICANS LOOK AT THESE GUYS AND SAY, "YOU’RE NUTS!"' – The G.O.P. elite tries to take its party back,” was not as slanted as that headline (mining a convenient quote that just happens to link the GOP with the insult "nuts"), but it was dotted with condescension and "far-right" labels, as well as a comparison of the GOP rhetoric to something out of a "survivalist's convention."

Bai also forwarded a large amount of doomsaying for a party that’s doing pretty well of late, if the 2010 election and current polls are to be believed. The cover headline underlined that unearned idea of a party in desperate straits: “Does Anyone Have A Grip On The G.O.P.?”

The Sunday Review cover story lament by New York Times environmental reporter Elisabeth Rosenthal, “Where Did Global Warming Go?”, collected examples of conservative “climate deniers” (does anyone actually deny that climate exists?) being mocked by environmental experts like Bill Clinton, as well as all of Europe, for not signing on to crippling regulations in the name of halting rising temperatures.

Rosenthal is certainly a believer in the theory that man is making the temperature rise in harmful fashion; in her reporting she has blamed about every problem under the sun on global warming, even calling on China and India to turn off their air conditioners to save the planet in the August 28 edition of the Sunday Review.

By criticizing the leftist Wall Street sit-in, bankers risk showing they don’t “get it,” New York Times reporters Nelson Schwartz and Eric Dash condescendingly suggested in a story at the top of the front page of Saturday’s Business Day, “In Private, Wall St. Bankers Dismiss Protesters as Unsophisticated.”

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman appeared on Charlie Rose’s talk show on PBS Wednesday night to discuss the leftist-anarchist Occupy Wall Street movement against inequality. Krugman’s encomium to the movement (he recently turned down urgings by his lefty fans to speak at Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan) begins around the 6 minute 45 second mark of the segment:

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?

New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter was in St. Petersburg, Fla., but that didn’t stop him from marking his media colleague’s burgeoning coverage of the Occupy Wall Street movement for Thursday’s “A News Story Is Growing With ‘Occupy’ Protests.” Stelter hyped the increasing media coverage that the lefty aggregation “Occupy Wall Street” has been granted as it spreads to other cities, including in Florida.

But Stelter wasn’t nearly so accomodating to the conservative Tea Party when it first broke through in early 2009.

Climate Wire, an activist environmental journalism outlet that supplies content for the New York Times website, has the standard issue pro-regulation, anti-free-market bias one would expect.

Conservative nonprofit Americans for Prosperity, funded by the liberal villains the Koch brothers, is a juicy target for liberals of all stripes, and on Wednesday Climate Wire’s Evan Lehmann dutifully filed “As Anti-Climate Group's Activities Rise, So Do Questions About Its Secret Finances.”

New York Times columnist Paul Krugman’s Tuesday morning blog post no doubt left his hordes of leftist fans bereft: “Why I’m Not In Zuccotti Park.” That’s the space in Lower Manhattan that’s been occupied by the loose affiliation of leftist Wall Street protesters for four weeks running. The brief item in full:

Former Executive Editor Bill Keller, now a columnist for the paper, used the tragic fire in Bastrop, Texas to let loose an Obama-inspired rant against the conservative argument for limited government (and again targeted Texas Gov. Rick Perry) on his New York Times blog Monday: “Life Without Government.”

Shorter Bill Keller: The New York Times is a liberal paper because we’re all cool tolerant educated urbanites here in Manhattan.

At an event at the LBJ presidential library in Austin, Texas on October 6 (hosted by the Texas Tribune, a nonprofit news organization that provides content for the Times), Keller confessed the Times had a “socially liberal” lean, if by “socially liberal” you mean cool. As reported by Rebecca Shapiro at Huffington Post:

New York Times media reporter Brian Stelter marked the 15th anniversary of Fox News on the front of Monday’s Business section with a profile of host Sean Hannity, whose program has been a channel mainstay from the beginning: “Victory Lap for Fox and Hannity.”

Stelter wasn’t hostile, but did use something a guest said on Hannity’s show to accuse Hannity of instigating “inflammatory rhetoric.” But another Stelter story in the same section failed to criticize a left-wing figure, Tavis Smiley, who engages in truly inflammatory rhetoric from a secure public perch at PBS.

Monday’s column by former New York Times Executive Editor Bill Keller, “Is the Tea Party Over?”, indulged in the usual doomsaying for the G.O.P.’s 2012 presidential prospects (too negative, too far to the right, etc.). Keller also found the “doofus” Gov. Perry guilty of giving “a wink to the evangelicals, a nod to the executioner, and an ardent defense of personal liberties for those who are heterosexual and don’t need an abortion.”

Keller, who as editor of the paper virtually ignored the Tea Party during its first year of existence, has now turned around and said the movement is about to blow its big political opportunity:

Following in the shameful steps of the Washington Post, the New York Times on Monday again tried to use the long-standing racially offensive name of a hunting camp leased by Texas Gov. Perry's family to imply that Perry, a Republican presidential candidate, was guilty of racial insensitivity: “For Perry, Texas Roots Include Racial Backdrop – Hunting Camp Name Has Put Focus On the Other Side of His Origin Story.”

The text box was not exactly a smoking gun: “An early life in which exposure to diversity was not a common feature.”

From the editorial page to the news pages to a page of graphic design, the spreading leftist protest known as Occupy Wall Street occupied major swathes of Sunday’s New York Times, and the mood was celebratory – at last the left wing (or as the Times puts it, “populist message”) is off the mat and fighting back.

In the paper’s Sunday Review, journalism professor and veteran leftist Todd Gitlin gushed over the leftist revival on Wall Street (while attacking the Tea Party) in “The Left Declares Its Independence.”

Energy Department bureaucrat Jonathan Silver tendered his resignation on October 6, effective the following day. Silver led the Energy Department office that approved the ill-fated $528 million loan to solar energy firm Solyndra, despite concerns from some in the White House that it was a disaster waiting to happen.

Although the development occurred the same day as President Obama reiterated his support for similar loans for green energy, the New York Times buried staff writer Matthew Wald's story on page A17 of the October 7 paper.

Wald closed his article by quoting President Obama's defense of loans to green energy firms:

The left-wing, anti-capitalist Occupy Wall Street camp-out in Lower Manhattan stretched into its third week, bolstered by an influx of labor unions. The story made the front of Thursday’s New York Times along with a large photo of protestors in Foley Square, “Seeking Energy, Unions Join Wall Street Protest.”

It’s a far cry from the paper’s coverage of the first major Tea Party rally in Manhattan. The paper’s hostile reporting of the nationwide Tea Party rallies on April 15, 2009 (Tax Day) virtually ignored a supportive crowd of thousands, citing in a single sentence an Associated Press report on Newt Gingrich speaking at the Manhattan rally. The report made Page 16.

New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman declared the G.O.P. “a danger to itself and to the country” in his Wednesday column, “No Christie, No Bargain.”

New York Times columnists Gail Collins and David Brooks talked about “The Long Stagnation” in their weekly online chat posted Wednesday.

When Brooks, the paper’s idea of a conservative columnist, said he wasn’t impressed by the numbers participating in the Occupy Wall Street protest, compared to the figures generated at Tea Party rallies, Collins, the paper’s former editorial page editor, indignantly replied the Tea Party had no principles besides a "crazed" refusal to accept the idea of Democrats in power:

New York Times White House reporters Jackie Calmes and Jennifer Steinhauer were with Obama on the money-raising trail in Texas and did their usual spin job for the partisan, combative president in Wednesday’s “Obama Pitches Jobs Bill And Appeals to Donors.”

President Obama on Tuesday combined fund-raising and campaigning for his jobs bill in the home state of the Republican presidential candidate Rick Perry and the Congressional district of a House Republican leader, and he did not shy away from telling donors that they and Texas’ oil companies should pay more taxes for the nation’s good.

Campbell Robertson cranked the melodrama up to eleven in his New York Times story on Tuesday on the upholding by a federal judge of a tough new immigration law in Alabama: “After Ruling, Hispanics Flee an Alabama Town – Fears Rise Over a Tough Law on Immigrants.” Robertson talked of “the vanishing” and dabbled in a little Creative Writing 101: “In certain neighborhoods the streets are uncommonly quiet, like the aftermath of some sort of rapture.”

Illegal immigration is prehaps the issue most likely to trigger the paper’s liberal bias, and Robertson doesn’t disappoint. In his dramatic telling, the flight from the town of Albertville, Ala., was like something out of a science fiction movie:

In Tuesday’s “Anti-Wall Street Protests Spreading to Cities Large and Small,” New York Times reporters Erik Eckholm and Timothy Williams bolster the “populist” left-wing activists protesting against greedy bankers (among other items of the standard left-wing wish list) in Lower Manhattan.

While the Times’s coverage of conservative Tea Party rallies pointed out the most extreme and “fringe” elements present, the paper has thus far eschewed labels like "far-left" or even "liberal," and ignored the cadre of Communists and offensive posters decrying “Nazi bankers” in Zuccotti Park in Lower Manhattan.

Richard Oppel Jr.’s front-page New York Times story on Monday, “Snag for Perry: Offensive Name At Texas Camp,” catches up with a long, thinly sourced Washington Post article on a hunting camp in Texas, leased by Perry’s family, whose name included a racial epithet written on a rock by a camp entrance.

Although the Perry connection is extremely tenuous (the camp’s name predated the Perry family's involvement, and the family had the rock painted over years ago) both the headline (“snag”) and a photo caption wishfully insisted the new controversy had already knocked Perry off stride: “His presidential campaign has been on the defensive in recent days.”

Occupy Wall Street, the floating leftist protest in Manhattan that’s camped out in downtown Manhattan in an endless protest against...something, attempted to migrate to Brooklyn this weekend, blocking vehicle traffic on the Brooklyn Bridge and resulting in mass arrests.

The New York Times, whose attitude toward Tea Party rallies was invariably hostile, blasted support throughout the weekend for the vague leftist “occupation” of Wall Street and the Brooklyn Bridge. Sunday’s National section picked up on the arrests: “About 500 Arrested as Demonstrators Try to Cross Brooklyn Bridge” by Al Baker and Colin Moynihan, with additional reporting by Natasha Lennard and William Rashbaum (Lennard will play a role later).

The New York Times may not give Texas Gov. Rick Perry credit for his state’s booming economy, but it will certainly attack him for his state’s supposedly awful record on providing health care. Emily Ramshaw reported “Few Bright Spots in Perry’s Health Care Record” for Friday’s edition.

Ramshaw, a reporter for the Texas Tribune, a left-leaning nonprofit news organization based in Austin that has a content partnership with the Times, played the same sour notes on Perry and Texas health-care statistics as the paper’s regular reporters.

Stupid white men for the G.O.P.? New York Times White House reporters Jackie Calmes and Mark Landler teamed up for Friday’s front-page campaign preview, “Obama Charts A New Route to Re-election.” In a change from the paper’s standard politically correct approach to race and class, the reporters crudely emphasized that “less-educated, low-income whites” tend to support Republicans. (What happened to "the party of the rich"?)

With his support among blue-collar white voters far weaker than among white-collar independents, President Obama is charting an alternative course to re-election should he be unable to win Ohio and other industrial states traditionally essential to Democratic presidential victories.

President Obama no longer has an Israel problem, Jerusalem Bureau Chief Ethan Bronner reported on Thursday, bolstering Obama’s pro-Israel credentials by assuring Times readers that the president’s recent speech at the United Nations on Israel was pro-Israel. Bronner also broadcasted pro-Obama results from an online poll conducted by the Jerusalem Post – although online polls are an unreliable format the paper rarely consider newsworthy, in “Israelis Happy at Home But Glum About Peace.”

Moreover, the sense over the past two years that President Obama was growing angry with Israel and steering American policy away from its interests subsided last week. The parts of Mr. Obama’s United Nations speech about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict could have been written by any official here. It said nothing about Israeli settlements, the 1967 lines, occupation or Palestinian suffering, focusing instead on Israel’s defense needs.

Does the New York Times fear a Chris Christie presidential run?

On Thursday reporters Michael Shear (pictured above) and Richard Perez-Pena issued the New Jersey governor a pre-emptive reality check in response to his speech at the Reagan Presidential Library: “Not All Buy Christie’s Assertions of Bipartisanship – New Jersey Governor’s Critics Say Acrimonious Dealings Accompany Accomplishments.” But the Times provided a lopsided portrait, either by leaving out the offensive things Christie’s opponents have said about him, or actually quoting Democrats insulting Christie as if that somehow proves Christie is offensive.