The Media Research Center’s Rich Noyes appeared on Fox News’ Fox and Friends Sunday to discuss The New York Times’ so called “apology letter” to their subscribers for their terrible reporting during the election, that didn’t really sound like an apology. “Yeah, you’ve got to admit what you've done wrong if you're going to try to get it right in the future,” scolded Noyes, “And I think what The Times did wrong, was not just predicting the election wrong but tried to influence it every step of the way with hit piece after hit piece on Donald Trump.”
Fox News’ Abby Huntsman noted that the Times and the rest of the media elite have reported on Trump with almost a discontent for his supporters. Noyes agreed, arguing:
When they would interview Trump people, Trump supporters at these rallies it was to show them being kooky people, as opposed to trying to figure out was going, what was motivating them, what were the economic issues that had been unaddressed in the last eight years that would make them go this way.
Noyes also discussed how the liberal media’s narrative at the start of the election cycle was that Hillary Clinton was the most qualified candidate ever, and that “all of their coverage was designed to prove their prejudice about this election.” And The New York Times was not the only media outlet to report in this manner, “There’s ABC, CBS, NBC, a lot of these liberal New York based media outlets were blindsided by the election. They tried to influence it in a way to help Hillary Clinton.”
“And they’re all losers in this election,” Noyes chided.
Transcript below:
<<< Please support MRC's NewsBusters team with a tax-deductible contribution today. >>>
FNC
Fox and Friends Sunday
November 13, 2016
8:45:42 AM EasternPETE HEGSETH: Welcome back. New York Times publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr issuing an unprecedented apology, writing in a letter to subscribers, and we quote, “As we reflect on this week's momentous result and months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate (is a key word) ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. We cannot deliver the independent original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our subscribers.”
ABBY HUNTSMAN: But after turning a blind eye to the reality of the election, is this mia copa too little, too late?
CLAYTON MORRIS: Well joining us now to weigh in, from the Media Research Center is Richard Noyes. Nice to see you this morning Rich. And you know, I have to say, we posted this earlier and a lot of people, viewers this morning saying that's not an apology. It's just basically saying we're going to try harder.
RICH NOYES: Yeah, you’ve got to admit what you've done wrong if you're going to try to get it right in the future. And I think what The Times did wrong, was not just predicting the election wrong but tried to influence it every step of the way with hit piece after hit piece on Donald Trump. And that was missing the mood of the voters, but also trying to tamper with the election.
HUNTSMAN: Yeah, the big takeaway from this election was the American people giving the middle finger to the establishment, the media elite as you could call The New York Times. And it seems like they've had an attitude, right? That The New York Times acting as if they knew better than the American people. They knew what was going to happen. And much to their surprise, they were wrong.
NOYES: Right, I think they decided on a narrative early on in this election, that Donald Trump was unfit, unworthy to be president, Hillary Clinton was the only choice. So all of their coverage was designed to prove their prejudice about this election. You know, when they would interview Trump people, Trump supporters at these rallies it was to show them being kooky people, as opposed to trying to figure out was going, what was motivating them, what were the economic issues that had been unaddressed in the last eight years that would make them go this way. And I think they just choosing the conclusion first and then reporting to fill in gaps is bias reporting and made them really miss the political story of the decade.
HEGSETH: Very much so, and doesn't count as an apology if (in that same letter) you say we thought we were fair throughout the entire election. But you know what they suffer from, is their bottom line. They’re a business and they’ve got to make money, and they are not making it. They've been hearing from their readers. Here's a letter from a New York Times reader, Nick Crawford from Plymouth, Michigan, he writes, “Perhaps the elect result would not be such a surprise if your reporting had acknowledged what ordinary Americans care about, rather an pushing the limited agenda of your editors. Please come down from you New York City skyscraper and join the rest of us.” You know, I think Nick speaks for a lot of people.
NOYES: I think he does. And I think it's also not just The New York Times. There’s ABC, CBS, NBC, a lot of these liberal New York based media outlets were blindsided by the election. They tried to influence it in a way to help Hillary Clinton. And they’re all losers in this election.
HUNTSMAN: Yeah. Well, Tuesday was a huge wake-up call. And if it wasn’t, it needs to be.
HEDSETH: We’ll see if it will be. It's a challenge, you can't turn off the progressive switch when you’ve got an agenda. We’ll see how they do.
HUNTSMAN: We’ll see if it’s too little too late. Alright, good to see you this morning, thanks Rich.
NOYES: Thanks.
