I make ZERO bones about the fact that I think the NYT is doing more harm to our democracy than any other news organization, and I include Fox News on that list.
You, dear reader, who I would have to assume is a left-leaning voter that frequents center-left media content, are probably asking yourself, “Why do you say that?” (If you aren’t thinking, “You are crazy,”).
But hear me out on this. Fox News has a larger reach, but the NTY has a much larger influence; that difference is critical.
The media industry has already baked in the fact that Fox News is in the bag for the GOP, this is understood. Serious journalists don’t aspire to work at Fox; in fact, many serious journalists have bailed on the organization over the last few years. Everyone knows Fox is just an extension of the GOP, that reputation follows the organization around, and many journalists don’t want that reputation on their resume.
But what is also “understood” in the journalism industry is that the NYT is the “paper of record,” with the assumption that they run center-left. When it comes to setting the tone for the industry, the NYT is near, if not AT, the top of the list, Fox News just isn’t.
Most people in the industry have stars in their eyes about the NYT storied history. In many ways, working for the NYT isn’t just a ticket to the big leagues, it’s like getting a starting position on the modern Kansas City Chiefs, the New England Patriots of the last decade or the Pittsburgh Steelers from the 70’s (or even the early 2000’s).
If you do a Google search on “What is the US paper of record?” this is the first thing you will get back:
The United States has at least four national newspapers of record, including The New York Times, The Wall Street Journal, The Los Angeles Times, and The Washington Post. The New York Times and The Washington Post are often referred to as the country's "newspaper of record". The New York Times is considered the complete newspaper of record for its news, comment, and tables of securities and commodities.
So when the NYT decides to, I don’t know, focus on Hillary’s emails for months and months at a time for example, it’s no wonder that the rest of the media follows along.
Or, let’s say when the NYT decides to focus completely on Biden’s age without mentioning that Trump is nearly as old and is clearly showing much worse signs of mental and physical decline, what do we expect to hear from the rest of the media?
Let’s start here:
That flood of reporting from the Times leaks out into the rest of the media ecosphere. It becomes a “serious” talking point in the media because the NYT is a “serious” paper don’t ya know?!?!
So Biden went on Howard Stern for an unannounced interview, and it appears he did so because he is also fuming about the biased coverage from the NYT.
This Raw Story article is pretty interesting. One quote from that article states
But the impetus behind the president's move appears to be a rare and unsigned statement from The New York Times Company, defending the "paper of record" after months of anger from the public over what some say is biased negative coverage of the Biden presidency and, especially, a Thursday report by Politico claiming Times Publisher A.G. Sulzberger is furious the president has refused to give the "Grey Lady" an in-person interview.
So, a big takeaway from that snip above is the NYT IS feeling the heat from the public and A.G. Sulzberger is “furious.”
If you still have a subscription to the NYT (and my first question is WHY, and if you say “because you like their recipes or their crossword,” I am going to scream, you can get that stuff from other places, and guess what? Our democracy means a LOT more than a good batch of homemade chili… and I LOVE me some chili), then you should seriously consider canceling it because we should keep up the heat.
But, if you are still on the fence and you want to believe the NYT is a good actor on the media stage, make sure you read this….
"In Sulzberger’s view," Politico explained, "only an interview with a paper like the Times can verify that the 81-year-old Biden is still fit to hold the presidency."
And this...
“'All these Biden people think that the problem is Peter Baker or whatever reporter they’re mad at that day,' one Times journalist said. 'It’s A.G. He’s the one who is pi--ed [that] Biden hasn’t done any interviews and quietly encourages all the tough reporting on his age.'"
…. twice. Go ahead, go back and read these two snippets from that Raw Story article again.
So let me put this in perspective:
1. ONLY the NYT can determine that a presidential candidate is fit for office.
2. They don’t bother making that claim for all candidates running, just Joe Biden.
3. They are encouraging their newsroom to be critical of Joe Biden specifically because they are angry that he will not sit down with them… meaning they are intentionally influencing the industry and the nation as a whole for their own reasons (that’s some journalistic integrity right there /S).
Got ya! What a bunch of clueless, short-sighted, pompous asshats.
And remember, due to their outsized influence on the news media as a whole, this attitude is setting a standard for the rest of the industry. If you are frustrated about both sides and what about’ism reporting, IT STARTS WITH THE NYT.
And it really appears that it all comes down to the fact that their fee-fees are hurt because Biden isn’t playing their game. Good on him!
And FUCK the NYT! If you want to see how good journalism is done, I HIGHLY recommend reading this letter from the editor on the Cleveland Plain Dealer site. And by the way, it appears the Cleveland Plain Dealer actually picked up subscriptions for just doing honest reporting about Trump and Biden… in OHIO, for Zeus’s sake.
If you are still subscribing to the NYT, please consider dropping your subscription and supporting real media. Your friendly Dailly Kos is an excellent place to send your hard-earned dollars instead.