Who's a greater threat to democracy? Biden, Trump or the New York Times?
In a few years, you'll be rid of Trump and Biden. But the New York Times, like termites, will be with us forever.
The answer: All of the above.
The accusations from both sides that President Biden and former President Donald Trump are “threats to democracy” are so threadbare, but true, that they’re hardly worth repeating.
To name just a couple: Trump’s truly goofy attempt to stay in office despite losing an election. Biden’s refusal to enforce immigration laws as millions of illegal aliens flood into America.
But the New York Times? Certainly that paper’s newsroom would find it a riot that anyone would suggest that the “paper of record” would be a threat to democracy.
But it’s not difficult to demonstrate. Let’s take an in-depth look at just one Times story that fails the primary purpose of journalism to ensure the survival of democracy: The objective and fair reporting of the news. As opposed to the favoring of one candidate, political party or issue.
Here’s the New York Times story with selected examples (in italic quotes):
Trump Signals an Election Year Full of Falsehoods on Jan. 6 and Democracy
By Michael C. Bender, Lisa Lerer and Michael Gold
Let us start with headline: No argument from me that Trump is a threat to democracy. But is he the only candidate who is “full of falsehoods?” Obviously not. Where to start? Here’s a short look from the National Review: “Washington Post Fact-Checker Gives Up on Recording Biden’s Lies.”
“In dueling sets of speeches, Donald Trump and President Biden are framing the election as a battle for the future of democracy — with Mr. Trump brazenly casting Mr. Biden as the true menace.” [My emphasis.] No mention that Biden “brazenly” says the same thing about Trump.
“Three years after the former president’s supporters stormed the Capitol, Mr. Trump and his campaign are engaged in an audacious and baseless attempt to paint Mr. Biden as the true menace to the nation’s foundational underpinnings.” [My emphasis.] Baseless? Who says? No attribution here. So, it’s the reporters’ view that one side is right and the other is wrong.
“The result has been a salvo of recriminations from the top candidates in each party….” Bravo. The reporters hint that there are two sides to the story. But the rest of the article leans in one direction.
“[Trump] was impeached the first time after asking Volodymyr Zelensky, the president of Ukraine, to dig up dirt on Mr. Biden and his son — even as Mr. Trump accused the Biden family of unethical behavior in the Eastern European country.” True, he was impeached. But not mentioned is that he was acquitted by the Senate. Twice. Not mentioned is son Hunter’s Ukrainian money tree and Joe’s bragging that he got a Ukrainian prosecutor fired for looking into Hunter’s business pals’ alleged corruption.
“While Democratic voters appear wary of Mr. Biden’s age and relatively unenthusiastic about his candidacy, they are firmly united by the idea that Mr. Trump has broken the public trust.” Just as Republican voters are united by the idea that Biden has criminally benefited from his son’s business dealings by selling the Biden name.
“In 2022, the former president faced a resounding rejection from voters when he helped make his false election claims one of the top issues in the midterm elections.” [My emphasis.] False, according to whom? Again taking sides. One side says they are false, the other side says they’re true. It should instead read, “…helped make his election claims….”
At the end of the story, the Times promised: “When we learn of a mistake, we acknowledge it with a correction. If you spot an error, please let us know at nytnews@nytimes.com.” Most likely, the editors will assert that the above items are not “mistakes,” but the “truth.”
These items might also be viewed as quibbles. They’re not. They go to the heart of the Times betrayal of the journalism profession. Taken together, these supposedly venial sins stack up to the kind of bias that so many find in the paper, and to which the paper is blind. If I was on the Times copydesk, I would have done my job and at least challenged the reporters to justify their insertion of their views into a news story.
Save it for the opinion columns.
You can find similar problems frequently in the Times. Here’s another example that’s more appropriate as an opinion column:
One of Trump’s Oldest Tactics in Business and Politics: I’m Rubber. You’re Glue.Whenever Donald Trump is accused of something, he responds by accusing his opponent of that exact thing. The idea is less to argue that Mr. Trump is clean than to suggest that everyone else is dirty.
And there’s this offer from the editors:
Sign up for the Trump on Trial newsletter. The latest news and analysis on the trials of Donald Trump in New York, Florida, Georgia and Washington, D.C. Get it sent to your inbox.
Where is a package of news analyses of the Biden family corruption accusation that will get sent to your inbox? Again, one can only assume that the Times wants you to believe that Trump is guilty and Biden isn’t.
Dennis Byrne is a retire Chicago journalist and author. dennis@dennisbyrne.net