WASHINGTON, November 13, 2016 — The dean of American journalism, The New York Times, has egg on its face.
Since the day Donald J. Trump announced he was running for the Republican presidential nomination in June 2015, America’s so-called newspaper of record consistently and routinely denounced the real estate tycoon as a racist, no-nothing, sexist, ill-mannered brute.
His supporters, they said, were mostly white and angry over the loss of U.S. manufacturing jobs and lacked – oh my! – college educations. Hillary Clinton simplified the description further, labeling them “a basket of deplorables” and members of the frightful “alt-right,” which purportedly dwell several hellish levels below “the vast, right-wing conspiracy.”
In an open letter appearing in The New York Times Friday, publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr. admitted that the 2016 presidential election “reached a dramatic and unexpected climax” and asked, “Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?”
As the question clearly indicates, the Times and its slithering imitators skewed their coverage to the far left to comfort the prejudices of Washington’s governing elites, Democrat and Republican alike.
The Times insisted that those holding opposite opinions – the forgotten men and women of flyover country – could be discounted as irrelevant.
As President-elect Donald Trump later tweeted, “Wow, the nytimes is losing thousands of subscribers because of their very poor and highly inaccurate coverage of the ‘Trump phenomena.'” In a follow-up tweet, he mused, “I wonder if it will change?’” He then answered his own question: “doubt it.”
Saturday, an estimated 8,000 anti-Trump protestors marched through the streets of Los Angeles in what the L.A. Times described as an “outpouring of public frustration over the results of the voting, reflecting deep fears about what Trump will do in office.”
That frustration was in no small part fueled by months and months of biased news reports insisting that a Trump presidency was a virtual impossibility.
Newspapers should be losing subscribers, those still gullible dupes so willing to believe what they read in the newspapers and see on the TV news reports and talk shows, not to mention the results of the media’s endless march of obviously phony polls.
“It is impossible to read through the reports in the communist press without realizing that they are consciously aimed at a public ignorant of the facts and have no other purpose than to work up prejudice,” said George Orwell in his book “Homage to Catalonia.”
For his part, New York Times publisher Sulzberger told readers, “As we reflect on this week’s momentous [election] result and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of the Times journalism.”
To remaining subscribers of the Times and other newspapers that disgraced themselves in this election cycle: Quietly reflect on the past months of biased reporting and polling by the Times and others. Then call and cancel your subscriptions.