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. ℹ️ Info           ~ Aristotle Sabouni Created: 2022-07-04

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.

---

🔗 More

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

Bias NYT is the PRAVDA of the U.S.: dedicated water carriers of the far left, with a history of bias.

Tags: NYT  NYT/Bias