Accuracy in Media

Aware that their credibility is shot with the American people, the publisher and executive editor of The New York Times sent a “To our readers” note on Friday, saying, “we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism.”

This was another way of saying, “Sorry, we blew it,” without being honest with readers.

Those familiar with the paper’s “journalism” understand this to be media bias. But Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr. and Dean Baquet were suggesting something else—that something had gone wrong and they don’t quite know what happened, but don’t worry because the Times will get back to its mission of reporting truthfully.

Beating around the bush, they said Trump’s victory was “the biggest political story of the year,” which had “reached a dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night…”

The word “unexpected” means that the paper’s predictions were wrong.

Then they said that the paper’s newsroom had covered the campaign “with agility and creativity,” which are terms for incompetence and bias. Some people cling to the old-fashioned idea that a paper should report events objectively.

Pretending to reflect on the poor coverage, they finally got to the problem without saying so directly. They asked, “Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?” and “What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome?”

In other words, Trump’s “sheer unconventionality” caused the paper to misreport what was happening. He had appealed to mysterious “forces and strains,” terms that apparently refer to the voters.

Sulzberger and Baquet insisted that the Times will “report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you.”

In other words, they blew it during the 2016 campaign and will try to do better next time. But nothing is really changing at the paper. Nobody is being fired. And nobody is being hired who has an understanding of the conservative electorate.

The paper, they said, will “hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly.”

But who will hold The New York Times accountable?

In a real howler, they then claimed, “We believe we reported on both candidates fairly during the presidential campaign. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.”

This is another indication that the paper is hopelessly liberal, and that nothing will really change.

The business as usual attitude was reflected in the front-page headline in the Times after Trump won: “Democrats, Students and Foreign Allies Face the Reality of a Trump Presidency.”

As Accuracy in Media Chairman Don Irvine noted, the headline was even funny to various MSNBC personalities, because it focused on the disappointment of liberals at Trump’s victory, rather than the victory itself.

Mark Halperin commented, “If a Democratic candidate who was thought to have a 10 percent chance of winning by The New York Times that ended up winning, and winning red states as Trump won blue states, I don’t think that would have been the headline. And I’ll just say again, the responsibility of journalists is to not report on their biases. It’s to go out and understand the country through the prism of the election and say, ‘Why are people feeling the way they’re feeling?’”

Of course, the Times was not alone.

Consider the story in Politico headlined, “Insiders: Clinton would crush Trump in November.” It began, “In the swing states that matter most in the presidential race, Donald Trump doesn’t have a prayer against Hillary Clinton in the general election.”

In a story headlined, “The Democrat Media Complex Will Never Understand What Happened Tuesday Night,” Stephen Kruiser at PJ Media commented that the talking heads want desperately to avoid the topic of the “overwhelming lack of political and intellectual diversity in their ranks,” but that the problem of their liberalism is compounded by their laziness.

This is a fact, as reflected in my analysis of Post “journalist” Dana Milbank, who got caught asking Democratic Party officials for help on an anti-Trump column.

For his part, Milbank crafted another anti-Trump column after the Trump victory, in the form of a letter to his daughter. “This is a sad day for our country,” he told her. “I want you to know that I did everything I could to prevent this from happening. My efforts and those of many others came up short.”

Those “many others” were in the media and the Democratic Party, for whom Milbank worked. Perhaps Post owner Jeff Bezos ought to ask the Democrats to pay Milbank’s salary.

Milbank told his daughter, “You are going to be okay.”

That’s more than what we can say about Milbank. He is not okay. He is more than just a lazy liberal who gets the Democratic Party to help write his columns. He is completely out of touch with the America he claims to be writing about.

Like those at the Times, Milbank and others at the Post will never change. They are elitists whose hatred for their fellow Americans borders on mental illness.

Like other liberals, they claim to be on a crusade for “the children,” in his case his daughter. It’s frankly despicable that he would use his kid as a political prop. She needs our prayers.




Ready to fight back against media bias?
Join us by donating to AIM today.

Comments

  • Larry Dyer

    I find that I agree with Milbank on one thing, “It is a sad day for our country” when the mainstream media is so blinded by their own ideology that they misrepresent, distort, and slant the story to fit their agenda. Let’s put ’em out of business. They are nothing but propaganda outlets for the Democratic party! Well said, Cliff Kinkaid!

  • DJ17

    Excellent analysis.

  • Clintonispathetic

    So, after what appeared to be a great act of resistance, Wallonia dropped the bag.
    CETA: Playing With The Politics Of Power

  • efred1

    Boycott them and their sponsors! That’s the only way to get rid of them, starve them out. That, or get wealthy conservatives, like Rush Limbaugh, to buy them out. But that can be difficult.

    The other problem is the education system that creates these ignorant, biased reporters. Not only the university professors, but even primary, secondary and high school liberal educators need to be ferreted out and replaced with honorable, unbiased teachers, which will take a while. Remember Proverbs 22:6: “Train up a child in the way he should go: and when he is old, he will not depart from it.”

  • lauren

    there are 2 major groups in the dem party. the rich elitists that think they know it all but cant accomplish anything; and their slaves which the elitists keep trapped & under their control by keeping them in poverty, illiteracy, & gov handouts.

  • cjdera

    You are so right!

  • Realist

    The NYT has had their Come to Jesus moment, so they claim, but since their Jesus was the libcult apotheosis Obamesiah, I highly doubt that this exercise is anything other than another attempt to misdirect and change the focus away from their malfeasance and onto the high mindedness of claimed future intentions.

    Good luck with that, NYT.

    Since anything even approaching actual ethical behavior has become anathema to libcultists, preferring instead to invest every bit of their credulity and logic into their cults magical doctrine and premises, the notion that they can somehow rescue themselves from falling further down into their cult rabbit hole is, well, lets say it is fancifully optimistic. Just like W.C. Fields trying to force down a drink of water rather than booze, the libcult journOlista are certain to have a similar reaction when attempting to force down on the page anything that lies outside of their cult dogma or, HORRORS! Tells the truth that refutes libcult dogma.

    And has the execrable NYT proffered an apologia to their misinformed readers? Or ANYONE? I didn’t see that anywhere in their supposed mea culpa. Just like the Hildabeast giving one of her non apologies, saying that shes sorry THAT WE MISUNDERSTOOD HER LIES or something to that effect, the libcultists feel no remorse for their crimes against journalism and against their readers. They had bigger fish to fry, dammitt! They were working Fast and Furiously to bring about the libcult Nirvana that they know is just around the corner, so if they gots ta break a few unwritten rules and lie lie lie, cheat cheat cheat, steal steal steal, so what? What difference, at this point, does it make?

    Apparently none. To them, anyway.

  • Ron Long

    The New World Order Department of Propaganda got bitch slapped, just as they should. None of these idiots know how to investigate, and report on anything, including a Dog Show. Here is a tip for them, approach a story with an open mind, investigate, report the real facts by reporting the WHO, WHAT, WHEN, WHERE and HOW. Do not form a story on what you have been ordered to write or your personal opinion, there are OP ED pages for your opinion. Long past time for them to become JOURALISTs and not political hacks. Currently their profession has no credibility or honor.

  • jg collins

    The problem is their pervasive US-THEM attitude. To rejoin reality, they’d have to abandon their self-sanctified leftist airs. As if. Short of firing 60% of them, I don’t see any way to save the paper. My budgie will have to make doo without them.

  • Ted

    There’s no “objectivity” in journalism anymore … at least not since the advent of internet websites and echo-chambers like Breitbart, Huffington Post … and this rightwing ranting rag! Now, it’s all about “content marketing” (mostly opinion and curation) … aimed at the particular medium’s chosen audience. The only medium that still maintains a level of traditional reportorial standards is the Associated Press … and it may be the ONLY “news organization” left that still maintains its own cadre of traditional reporters.

    Anyways, GOPs, stop the ideological and extremist bitchin’. You got the president, the House, the Senate and, ultimately, the Supreme Court. Now, let’s see if all you clowns can actually “govern” in ways that truly benefit the majority and the general public good!

  • JustHuman

    The media cared only for sensationalism, and hell to anything else. I have 43 RSS feeds to read the latest bogus news. NO MORE. I’m planning a home page renovation, and thinking of leaving Disqus. I’ll go back to art and music. I have enough problems without the media adding to them. Someone should do a survey and count just how many times the name “Donald Trump” appeared in the headlines. No, Hillary isn’t a saint, but the media had the opportunity to help we the people but thew us away for money.

  • sox83cubs84

    It sounds like a lot of buck-passing from a dying newsrag. Hopefully, while Trump is President, there will be an obituary for the New York Slimes.

  • JustHuman

    Dear Media–what is so wrong about being honest???????

  • Peter

    If the NYT really wants to convert its stance to one of accurately reflecting public opinion, all they need to do is to print Huge jubilant headlines announcing jubilantly: –
    TRUMP VICTORIOUS – NATION JUBILANT.
    But since the truth is – the NYT is just a propaganda grinder, it only wants to dictate public opinion, which it attempted to do unsuccessfully and pathetically. It can no longer pull the wool over the people’s eyes, it regrets. It will not re-invent itself, becoming part of the solution. It will remain its own problem, hell bent on propaganda beating the drum of the hellish New World Order. It will not soften, but in the end it will regret what it foolishly stood for. It IS discredited.
    The ‘alternative media’ is the new viable news source.

  • Peter

    In the public fool system, teachers are adults among children, and children among adults.

  • Peter

    Only that they were honestly wrong.

  • Peter

    Its eulogy will not be nice. Probably damning in fact.

  • sox83cubs84

    It won’t be nice, but it WILL be well-deserved.

  • Peter

    There was nothing sensational about it. It was just morose.

  • Peter

    Trump was the object. And they kicked it around till he came up TRUMPS to their chagrin.

  • Peter

    You the people have triumphed over the ‘rags’ with their riches and bitch.
    The bubbly, vivacious, wide open mouthed, bug eyed rubber clown, Hillary, now has a grimace of scorn on her unsettling visage. And hell hath no fury like it.
    Hillary tried to change democracy – rule by the people regardless of sex, into a SEXOCRACY – rule by the most numerous sex, based statistically on gender and not brains.
    That men should vote for a man or woman, and women only for a woman because they are women, to win by statistics only.
    Hillary thought she was Wonder Woman, Queen of the Amazons. Women were not so dull as to fall for that kind of cheap sell tactic.
    Ladies all, she thought you would swallow it, if she kept it at the level of the least intelligent of you, to ensure that you all could understand. She probably knew women voters outnumbered the men. Otherwise she would have devised a demeaning sales strategy to woo the male vote.
    Hillary played a cheap shot, but the voters wanted value. They got that in Trump. Stiff cheese, Hillary.

  • hd625b

    Congress shall make no law… abridging the freedom of
    speech, or of the press…

    But they can buy the press.

  • WIREDIN

    Rare truth based article Mr. Kincaid, thank you. Now if only those biased, hack journalist, and newspapers would read it, recognize how/where they failed, and do something about it.

  • Peter

    Oh no! Not doo doos all over the crappy headline. That would be crap upon crap. Justice indeed.

  • Lee Ryan

    Go Cubs forever!

  • sox83cubs84

    Thanks…and I also hope that the Sox rise again in the near future, as well.

  • JMJ

    Mainstream media is horrendous. CNN & MSNBC blamed the fight between the campaign managers, at Harvard’s quadrennial postmortem conference, on Trump’s team for showing up with a “gloating attitude”. Clinton’s campaign manager stated that Trump’s win was because their campaign was centered around the white supremacist movement. Trump’s manager was offended and fired back…..you’re calling me a white supremacist?

    I’m listening to CNN right now and the newscaster stated that marginalized African Americans and Donald Trump supporters have more in common than they think they do. They just need to get together on one issue. ..race. Jesus Christo!!!!

    It is disgusting that we allow these people on the air. I wished they could be banned from the White House. They are nothing but a bunch of middle-school gossip mongers. This borders bullying. Do they not see how far they have diverted from journalism?

    Stop it already. The corruption sure extends past the White House. How can so many people be so blind?

  • JMJ

    Please someone explain to me why the left has become so extreme and radical and why so many people have this view. It defies logic.