Journalistic Bias and Pseudo Racism: The Case of the New York Times [Video]

New York Times Building

A very revealing transcript from an internal “town hall” meeting at the New York Times was reported on in the Friday, August 16th, 2019 issue of Newsbusters online. The transcript reveals two Leftist principles combining to herald a new and alarming era in the history of the Times and perhaps in mainstream journalism as well.

One of those principles is well known to conservatives. The other is not as recognized, but it is a very important, and dangerous, weapon of the Left.

The Poorly Hidden Principle: Journalistic Bias

It is hardly surprising that the Leftmedia is extremely biased against President Trump. This journal has covered the topic of Leftist bias in journalism on several occasions.

Journalistic biasIn fact, the transcript of this N.Y. Times internal meeting shows the same level of focused bias revealed by CNN in Project Veritas undercover videos from 2017. In those videos, a producer at CNN, John Bonifield, was asked about the cable network’s seeming obsession with Trump and the Russian ‘collusion’ narrative.

The producer gave an example of just how much CNN was focusing on the Russia narrative:

The CEO of CNN said in our internal meeting, he said, good job everybody covering the climate accords, but we’re done with that, let’s get back to Russia.

The Executive Editor of the N.Y. Times, Dean Baquet, couldn’t have given a more fitting example of the same bias against the President than the way he started the meeting.

Executive Editor Dean Baquet began his remarks by boasting about coverage of Russian collusion conspiracy theories. “We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well,” Baquet said. “Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story. …to write about race and class in a deeper way than we have in years.” Baquet declared “Chapter 1 of the story of Donald Trump, not only for our newsroom but, frankly, for our readers, was: Did Donald Trump have untoward relationships with the Russians, and was there obstruction of justice? That was a really hard story, by the way, let’s not forget that. We set ourselves up to cover that story.”

There you have it, folks, straight from the horse’s mouth. The most revered newspaper in the nation, if not the world, was laser-focused on the Russian ‘collusion delusion’ and then, along came Mueller and “his” report and the goal of taking out Trump was dashed.

Mueller collusion delsusionThis focus wasn’t for the sake of simply reporting the facts. This pervasive phony story from the Leftmedia extended into every part of both Trump and anyone remotely associated with him.

The lynchpin of the Left’s effort to destroy Trump was the Russia-collusion hoax, and that has now been effectively countered by the truth reluctantly presented by Mueller’s testimony. A trustworthy unbiased newspaper would do two things.

They would apologize for their false reporting and vow to get back to real news without the goal of removing the President from office. The N.Y. Times doesn’t qualify as trustworthy or unbiased, so of course, they used the rest of the internal meeting to instead look for another way of falsely condemning President Trump.

The Emerging Principle: Omnipresent Pseudo-Racism

The meeting went on to explore what direction their attacks against the President should now take. The answer came from another high-level staffer who challenged Baquet about his reluctance to use the word “racist” against Trump, and frankly wanted the Times to cry “racism” about everything!

This staffer question in general caught a lot of attention:

“I have another question about racism. I’m wondering to what extent you think that the fact of racism and white supremacy being sort of the foundation of this country should play into our reporting. Just because it feels to me like it should be a starting point, you know? Like these conversations about what is racist, what isn’t racist. I just feel like racism is in everything. It should be considered in our science reporting, in our culture reporting, in our national reporting. And so, to me, it’s less about the individual instances of racism, and sort of how we’re thinking about racism and white supremacy as the foundation of all of the systems in the country.”

There are two critical statements made by this staffer. The first is that he feels “like racism is in everything,” and should be the basis for their reporting on science and culture and simply national news.

false racismThis staffer is an excellent example of what comes out of the American university system today. He is reflecting the mantra of “systemic racism” that has infected the academic Left for 60+ years.

The second statement shows the essence of almost all modern history teaching in the public school system for the last half-century and is the basis for his belief that racism is in ‘everything.’ His belief is that America itself was founded on ‘racism and white supremacy,’ and continues to exist as a racist nation today!

This strategy of branding the President as racist goes all the way back to the campaign of 2015-16 when candidate Trump began to speak of the problem of illegal aliens flooding America. The Left claims to this day that Trump called all Mexicans rapists and criminals then, which was a bald-faced lie then and is such today.

Trump specifically criticized the rampant criminal activities committed by illegal aliens coming across the U.S.-Mexico border, many of whom are Mexican nationals.

The same fraudulent charge of racism continues to be tossed out regularly by the Left concerning the statements the President made after the Charlottesville, Virginia protest that turned violent. Let’s set the record straight on that lie with this video from Prager University.

Thus, the narrative that the President is ‘racist’ is not a new tactic by the Left. However, the Times seems to believe that if they just keep repeating it enough and assigning this pseudo-racism as a motive for everything American, their blind readers will believe it.

They are probably correct about their most loyal readers. However, they also hope that some others who only casually follow the news will also believe this lie.

It becomes apparent that the media push for the remaining years of the Trump presidency will focus on this kind of pseudo-racism. However, since the word ‘racism’ itself has been vastly overused by the Leftmedia, it is becoming drained of real meaning.

After all, if everything is racist, then nothing is racist. Which is why this staffer, and the Leftmedia as well, are also using the words “white supremacy” and “white nationalism,” more often in place of simply screaming ‘racist’ at Trump and his supporters.

media biasThe only counter to this deceptive strategy is to call it out by showing the real truth as often as can be done. The few true journalists who will encounter these Leftist charges in the next few years should be certain they challenge them directly to produce facts, not false statements, in support of their false allegations.

If this doesn’t happen, then we as Americans must directly challenge the media itself and demand to know why not. The pseudo-racism of the Left must not become entrenched in society any more than it already is now.

This will likely become a repetitive and tedious task for anyone who tries to do it. It will take determination and grit to withstand and counter the Left, especially on the big social media platforms such as Facebook and Twitter.

The Left’s cry of ‘racist’ and ‘white supremacist’ is being heaped upon Trump and his supporters regardless of their ethnicity will continue to be employed to intimidate conservatives. That may be seen even this weekend in Portland, Oregon when the group “Patriot Prayer” and others come for a hopefully peaceful “Anti Antifa” rally.

This has already sparked some reaction from the “Rose City Antifa” group. I pray there is no violence there like the kind from Leftist Antifa thugs in June against Andy Ngo at another Portland demonstration.

The push of the Left to say Trump or any and all of his supporters are racist or white nationalists will be vicious, and my advice is twofold. First, don’t do this alone. We need the strength and encouragement of others who will stand along with us.

There are strong conservative voices on both Twitter and Facebook, as well as some new ones in the media like One America News, and they are making some headway. There are also alternate online sites such as Parler that won’t censor conservatives and where allies can be found.

Secondly, and most important, lean heavily upon faith in the LORD. Call to Him in prayer and study the teachings of His Word in the Scriptures so that heavenly strength can augment our earthly efforts toward what is right and true.

Therefore, having put away falsehood, let each one of you speak the truth with his neighbor, for we are members one of another. Ephesians 4:25 [ESV]

D.T. Osborn

Sources: The Holy Bible, English Standard Verison, Crossway Bibles, 2001

Featured and Top Image courtesy of Jens Scott Knudsen’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 1 courtesy of HonestReporting’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 2 courtesy of Victoria Pickering’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 3 courtesy of Susan Melkisethian’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License
Inset Image 4 courtesy of grace mcdonnough’s Flickr page – Creative Commons License

All other sources linked or cited in the text

Originally published in TIL Journal

Advertisements

So far, have you ever met any bad boys?

The following poem is curiously one of my best poems lol. I have met quite a good number of ‘bad boys’  – I mean according to ‘conventional’ standards. But for me an unconventional lady, it’s been one thrilling experience after the other. Maybe it isn’t really the boys who are bad but the way we look at and treat them which is bad? Maybe, they have done something bad, and that is what see and are quick to qualify them as bad? And now you yourself, are you a bad person?

The Bad Boys

Have you ever known any?

When you see them you just know right?

Can any good ever come out of them?

When all you ever hear, read or write about them is bad?

Could they really be born of a woman too?

I have known quiet a few Can’t tell how bad they were Can’t …

Continue reading please, hope we are inspired and motivated at the start of a new week, to work on our perspectives and ‘judgments’

While at it, for those who want to step it to MJ’s epic…

American reporting: gender bias?

This question of whether the US media are gender bias has been ruminating in my mind. It’s a serious one.

I have been following the US Presidential election primaries from campaigns, debates, voting and results; and this is the impression I get away with.

I am tempted to conclude that there are some key persons in the the US Press who do not want Hillary to win even though she seems unstoppable; and they have succeeded very subtly to spread their way of seeing things to the rest of the media.

Why do I say this?

Most of the reporting on Hillary is negative. See how long it took to hammer on Benghazi and Emails. This thing was exaggerated.

The front-runner on the Republican side seems to be given more coverage and exposure than Hillary who is also the forerunner on her side. Trump seems to enjoy twice as much publicity as Hillary Clinton. Watch the news or read the papers just for a day.

Look at the way their pictures are presented. Trump and Sanders are presented to look presidential; not Hillary.
See the way Clinton’s victories are announced. Compare to the way those of Sanders and Trump are announced – with pomp; but she only “Ekes out A Win’ in Ohio.” The Sander Michigan victory has been spoken of for more than a week; and read the way it is presented.

A lot of times when Clinton and Trump are reported on at the same time, as in “Big night for Trump and Clinton”, it is usually Trump who is mentioned first. This is a subtle advantage given to Trump.

All that I have seen leaves me with no doubt that there is a subtle desire and attempt by the media to break Hillary. But why? Is it because she is a woman in favor of Trump and Sanders because they are men? Is there gender bias in American reporting?

I wish this issue would be taken up for debate. One of the founding ideals of the American nation is equal opportunity for success for everybody without discrimination. It is true that America has never really succeeded to treat its women equally but if this country wants to continue to be the leader of the world, the lofty ideals on which she was founded must be translated into action.

Everyone ought to be treated equally and fairly even when it comes to reporting on elections.

Any attempt to discriminate or favor some candidates is sickening even when it is subtly done.