FAIR is the national progressive media watchdog group, challenging corporate media bias, spin and misinformation.
New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof, who was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 2006 for giving “voice to the voiceless” on international social justice issues, wrote an op-ed with a familiar message to longtime Kristof-watchers: that the poor aren’t actually poor because they lack enough money, but because of their own moral failings.
What the New York Times did is called “burying the lead”—hiding the most important aspect of the story—even though, technically, it’s right there at the end of the lead paragraph. In another story, Times readers had to read quite a bit farther down to get to the real point of the story.
If the New York Times is going to call Edward Snowden’s documents “stolen,” then journalists frequently receive “stolen” records from sources and use them as the basis for stories—as the Times itself has done with documents released by Snowden.
“President Obama has long refused to approve direct military intervention in Syria,” the New York Times asserted in an editorial. That’s a peculiar thing to say, given that the Times regularly covers the United States’ ongoing direct military intervention in Syria.
When the issue is trade deals, like the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP), the Times throws out its usual journalistic standards to push its pro–trade deal agenda. Therefore it is not surprising to see a story in the news section that was essentially a misleading advertisement for these trade deals.
If the Times is going to treat Bill Clinton’s record of marital infidelity as relevant to the contest between Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump, why doesn’t it treat Trump’s record of infidelity as relevant?
A New York Times report on public opinion, trade and the election cherry-picks numbers to make voters seem more pro-“free trade.”
President Obama is pulling out all the stops in pushing the TPP, and it seems the New York Times has decided to abandon journalistic principles to join this effort.
Some might say that the turn toward ugliness occurred in the afternoon, when a police officer fatally shot a black man.
Readers of a glowing New York Times profile of the Driscoll’s berry brand would have no clue about the four years of organizing, the walkouts, picket lines and lawsuits over labor violations leading to Driscoll’s being the subject of a high-profile international boycott.
Listen up, black kids, David Brooks is here to tell you why your choice of political activism is “counterproductive.” What’s strange is that Brooks never really bothers to explain why, exactly.
It’s troubling that a presidential candidate would be unaware of one of the main battlefields in one of the world’s deadliest conflicts. But even more troubling is that the New York Times, the US paper of record, can’t seem to figure out what Aleppo is, either.
Some of what the New York Times calls Jeremy Corbyn’s “hard left” positions are widely popular in the United Kingdom.
In an explainer about Donald Trump hiring Breitbart News’ Stephen Bannon as campaign CEO, the New York Times references FAIR’s criticism of the Times’ handling of the distorted ACORN story, which was promoted by Andrew Breitbart.
A Times writer offers the results of Honduran anti-violence programs as “a striking rebuke to the rising isolationists in American politics,” who “seem to have lost their faith in American power.” But she failed to explain how American power paved the way for the shocking rise in violence in Honduras.
But Nazario failed to explain how American power paved the way for the shocking rise in violence in Honduras.
Media interest in the issue of voter suppression is welcome; we hope they’ll remember that their spotlight is most useful where folks are still working in shadow.
It is not until the 20th paragraph of the 21-paragraph article, on page A13 in the print edition, that the New York Times reveals a crucial point of clarification: Clinton “campaign officials acknowledge that they have no evidence” that Russian President Vladimir Putin is trying to tilt the election to Donald Trump.
For those in center-left media, the impulse to rewrite their own role in selling the Iraq War is all too tempting–to turn Fox News into a cartoon propaganda outlet, and their own editorial drum-beating, war protester-mocking, aluminum tube-peddling and Dick Cheney water-carrying as “detached” journalism.
The New York Times provided no evidence that the presumed killer in Nice, France, was motivated by either politics or religion to commit violence–yet still labeled the murders as “terrorism,” as though the definition of that crime were based on ethnicity rather than motivation.
The New York Times attempts to provide insight into how modern-day racists negotiate the contemporary racial terrain. But this is hard to do, given that the Times along with other establishment media outlets are a crucial part of that terrain.
