Bias

NYT is the PRAVDA of the U.S.: dedicated water carriers of the far left, with a history of bias. NYT is the PRAVDA of the U.S.: dedicated water carriers of the far left, with a history of bias, mistakes, and errors that all favor the left. Their own editors, ombudsman, and reporters have admitted it. Stings have shown it. You can see it in their hiring and editorial decisions and content spin. Anyone that denies it, discredits themselves. ℹ️ Info           ~ Aristotle Sabouni Created: 2022-04-17

Those denying the bias are just demonstrating their own bias, or at least lack of observational awareness to everyone who knows anything on the topic. I'm not saying every article or topic is bad, they have an infrequent good or balancing piece in there, however they are rarely balanced on any issue. They are the voice of the left/DNC/Urban elites that live in NYC or wish they did.

Examples

• Admitted Bias - Their own Publishers, Ombudsman, Editors, Newsmen, staff, have all openly admitted the bias: Liz Spayd, Jim Rutenberg, Dean Baquet, Arthur S. Brisbane, Margaret Sullivan, Daniel Okrent, Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr, Jill Abramson, Frank Bruni, have all said they were biased.
• Award Bias - If the people on the far left like Poynter, J-Schools, Pulitzer, and so on, all praise you and lavish you with awards, that also hows what you stand for. Yes, far lefties love to give other far lefties participation trophies, which only shows that you say what other far left organizations want to hear. Look through the list of Pulitzer Prize winners for conservatives.
• Confessed Bias - Project Veritas did a sting (investigative journalism) on lessers at the company (they didn't know the cameras were running). Nick Dudich, Des Shoe, Todd Gordon, freely confessed or bragged about the Paper and their personal biases, and how they use/abuse that to bias others in the Press/Public.
• Observed Bias - New York Post, Beri Weiss, Economists have openly commented on the Paper or their Journalists/Editors bias, their stated position all align with the far left, Columbia journalism school did a study, and pointed out their obvious bias.
• Selection Bias - Then there are journalists/commentators they hire (or the articles they cover). The clique of NYT often admit they are left-leaning progressives (the majority), with maybe a few token RINOs, or Moderates. When the lefties leave, they are often more open about their biases in where they go or what they say. When the others leave, they admit how hostile the workplace was towards anyone with any intellectual diversity or wrong-think (e.g. conservative values).
• Statistical Bias - When all your errors are in one direction? That hints at a bias. Like when the virtually every scandal, exaggeration or someone is revealed to have an agenda, favors the left, and is against the right? When the NYT scooped or caught ignoring scandals, virtually every one makes the left look bad or the right look good? That's a strong indication of bias.

• Slogan - Even their slogan, "All the News That's Fit to Print", demonstrates that they selectively censor/edit what they don't want others to hear/read. Not, "All the News"... only the News they deem is, "Fit to Print".

Admitted Bias

           Main article: New York Times/Admitted Bias

Here's some examples of admitted bias: Liz Spayd (Ombudsman 2016) admits they were biased and did a poor job of balance in the election. Jim Rutenberg (Political Editor) wrote articles in the NYT admitting they were biased with regards to Trump... but it was "their duty" because Trump was mean (politically incorrect). Dean Baquet (executive editor), doubled down on Jim Rutenberg, by agreeing that since their clueless histrionics claimed he was uniquely dishonest (as long as you ignored Clinton, Bush, Al Gore, JFK, FDR, Johnson, Pelosi, Reid, Ted Kennedy, or other Democrats blatant dishonesty), that they had free reign to call Trump a liar, in ways that never applied to liars on the left side of the aisle. Journalistic standards are for PRAVDA or RT, not the NYT. Arthur S. Brisbane (Ombudsman 2012) admits progressive idealism permeates the paper (and others agreed with the observation) Margaret Sullivan (Ombudsman / Public Editor 2012) also admitted the paper had a liberal bias. Daniel Okrent (Ombudsman 2004) had said the same thing... only worse, “yes we’re biased left, but it’s because we’re right”. To quote him, “[the op-ed] is thoroughly saturated in liberal theology that when it occasionally strays from that point of view the shocked yelps from the left overwhelm even the ceaseless rumble of disapproval from the right”. After all their obvious problem was that since all their ombudsmen (Public editors) are telling them there's a problem, the Times solution was to kill the messenger and eliminate the role. Poof, no more bias. (LOL). Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr. (the publisher), said it’s not so much as liberal but “urban” bias. But that’s a euphemism for provincial coastal progressivism (which is the same thing). Jill Abramson. (executive editor), admitted they're openly anti-Trump (in ways they've only reserved for Republicans like Bush, Reagan, Nixon). And please stop asking her about all the examples of plagiarism in her book. (NOTE: I borrow stuff, all over these pages. Heck, the link to that plagiarism article was sent to me by a friend. But I do try to source correctly, tell people I'm "borrowing", and I don't pretend that I don't.). Frank Bruni. (columnist), defends Jill Abramson's position, by claiming the negative coverage as “the only honest way to cover this President", showing he doesn't know what "honest" or "journalism" means. But other than 5 ombudsman, the publisher, executive editor, and multiple writers all admitting they were more a biased propaganda outfit than a News Organizations (e.g. they had more interest in their agenda than telling the whole truth), what do you have? Oh, so much more.

Award Bias

           Main article: New York Times/Award Bias

But they still win more awards than other papers? Just not from any conservative organizations. They've virtually never gotten awards for fairness, expose's, or balance from anyone on the right, or in the middle. When their awards were shown to be for false information (Durante and the disinformation around the Holodomor in Urkaine), the NYT refuses to give the unearned awards back. If the people on the far left like Poynter, J-Schools, Pulitzer, and so on, all praise you and lavish you with awards, that also hows what you stand for. Yes, far lefties love to give other far lefties participation trophies, which only shows that you say what other far left organizations want to hear. Look through the list of Pulitzer Prize winners for conservatives.

Confessed Bias

           Main article: New York Times/Confessed Bias

❝ Ethical behavior is doing the right thing when no one else is watching — even when doing the wrong thing is legal. ❞ ~ Misattributed to Aldo Leopold ℹ️ Origin unknown  Well, investigative journalism is finding out what people say, when they think no one else is watching. One of the top organizations still finding out what people say when they think no one is watching, is Jame's O'keefe's Project Veritas. They did a series on the Times titled "American Pravda" (a term for the Times that I and others had used for generations). Part 1: Nick Dudich, Audience Strategy Editor for NYT admitted the Times always slants Anti-Trump News to the Front Page, that he openly worked for Obama/Hillary campaign, that Comey was his godfather, that he would never be objective, and other conflicts of interests. Part 2: Nick Dudich went further by explaining how he was using friendships and coordination with YouTube (like Earnest Pettie) to manipulate social media to intentionally influence the news. NYT Responds by claiming Dudich was only in a junior position, and violated their standards, so this mess should be ignored. Then it appears they fired him for telling the truth and embarassing the Times. Of course I have no problems with firing people with telling lies, but Krugman and other editors are allowed to say if they do that. But telling the truth can be career ending. Part 3: Des Shoe, Senior Home Page Editor, Admits a company culture of blatant DNC leaning bias at NYT, and their agenda is to sensationalize anti-Trump rhetoric, because that gets them subscribers. Part 4: Todd Gordon, IT Consultant (for 20 years) for The New York Times, Admits a blatant "Fuck Trump" bias at the NYT, and that they hate Trump, and they intentionally treat him unfairly.

Observed Bias

           Main article: New York Times/Observed Bias

Other places noticed the bias as well: New York Post has commented on it There were sites dedicated to monitoring the NYT bias... but it became so obvious that they shut it down. It's like reporting that Michael Moore is a fat socialist, it's so obvious that people get bored. Columbia journalism school case study on bias at the NYT: Anyone with a clue about economics has mocked Paul Krugman, their economics spokesperson. There's whole sites dedicated to his biases and hypocrisy -- flipping 180° on his positions, depending on if the President has a (d) or (r) after their name. But he's the top of the iceberg. Their positions on the NRA, Race, Consistency across administrations. You can predict how the NYT will respond to a current event by asking what the DNC position is, and how they would spin it, then reading that position in the NYT. Partiy Affiliation - Others point out this trick where they always mention party affiliation if there's a Republican involved in a scandal, but Democrats are outliers and party affiliation is never worthy of mention. Paul Krugman that this leftist anti-economist represents the paper on all things economic, screams hyper-partisan douchebaggery. Other economists mock him for his bias. And shit splatters. Bari Weiss the last moderate left at the NYT, quit with an open letter explaining it was because of continual harassment by her far-left consensus demanding colleagues, and the policies supporting that bias at the dying rag of post-journalism.

Selection Bias

           Main article: New York Times/Selection Bias

Then there are journalists/commentators they hire (or the articles they cover). The clique of NYT often admit they are left-leaning progressives (the majority), with maybe a few token RINOs, or Moderates. When the lefties leave, they are often more open about their biases in where they go or what they say. When the others leave, they admit how hostile the workplace was towards anyone with any intellectual diversity or wrong-think (e.g. conservative values).

Statistical Bias

           Main article: New York Times/Statistical Bias

When all your errors are in one direction? That hints at a bias. Like when the virtually every scandal, exaggeration or someone is revealed to have an agenda, favors the left, and is against the right? When the NYT scooped or caught ignoring scandals, virtually every one makes the left look bad or the right look good? You can believe that's pure coincidence, but random chance says that's highly unlikely. If you flip a coin 1,000 times, and it comes up tails in 995, aren't you going to think something is suspicious? Not if you're a Times reader.

---

🔗 More

New York Times A never great News Agency has become a shadow of their former self: admittedly biased, occasionally good content.

Tags: NYT/all