Anecdotal but I’ve been an NYT subscriber for years, primarily for investigative journalism and world politics etc… and I think the thing that stands out right now is they went from mostly pro-biden to 100% Biden sucks ballz over night.
The last 2 weeks have been wall to wall articles about why Biden sucks and needs to hit the road. They are working it into every random topic. “Movie theater ticket sales are down as customers are worried about Biden getting enough sleep”. “As the All-Star game rosters are revealed fans are asking if Biden will be able to stay awake long enough to see the end of the game”. It’s unavoidable and peppered into every article. Op Eds are another animal. Every talking head at the paper making their case for him to beat it.
It’s been really stark. Like the entire staff just flipped like a switch all at once.
I have been a NY Times reader for a long time. It definitely leans center left, but it’s not a propaganda rag. You can say the same thing about John Stewart.
I think a lot of the comments are from people that are not subscribers, nor daily readers. Only injesting the public links. And this may skew what you takeaway versus what I takeaway.
I simply do not see putting thumb on scale for the Donald. You, and many of you are, can argue that the NY Times is unfairly going after President Biden. Of, heaven forbid, they are correct and their Fourth Estate opinion is that Biden has a very high risk of throwing it to Trump by staying in.
Here’s from today’s editorial: “Mr. Trump is manifestly unfit to serve as president, and there is reason to believe a majority of the American people still can be rallied against his candidacy. But Democrats will struggle to press that case with voters so long as their own standard-bearer is a man who also appears unfit to serve as president for the next four years, albeit for very different reasons.”
You seem to have missed the article from Politico shared in post #18 of this thread (among other places) so here is a link to the post with a link to the article. Publisher Sulzberger has a grudge against the Biden Administration because they have not been as deferential to them as he feels they should be. This is not something that has been going on for a couple of weeks but for MONTHS.
And I say that as someone who disagrees with the basic premise of this thread - I don’t see the NYT as specifically pro-Trump but the editorial board and publisher are clearly anti-Biden.
@China_Guy Your thought that a lot of the comments here are not from daily readers or subscribers appears to be incorrect since many comments are coming from long time daily readers or subscribers like me. Or is a 37 year daily reader not long term enough? Also, note here and elsewhere the number of posters saying they have canceled their subscriptions because of this bias specifically.
Read the article in Politico. It is clear from that and the “Is Biden too Old?” articles and op-ed pieces they have been publishing since early this year that they have a grudge against Biden that comes from the top. Their coverage has been seriously skewed for a while now.
I read it every day, although I’ve pared down my reading of the opinion section over the last few years (except for Collins and Krugman).
Anyway, they do seem to be clearly anti-Biden and are pushing hard for him to drop out. But, they are definitely not pro-Trump, I mean, not even close. As I think I said above, all of their righty opinion writers are never-Trumpers except maybe Douthat – I don’t know where he stands.
This is the NYT Opinion piece today (gift link) calling for the party to engage in a public revolt and throw Biden off the ticket. Disgusting. Clearly Biden has hurt Sulzberger’s fee fees.
And they were getting slammed so hard by readers they’ve already shut off comments. Chickenshits.
In a race where only two candidates can win, those are the same position. This is something that I’ve seen people on the progressive left not understand.
Also, your most recent link is messed up. It’s not a gift link to the NYT.
Not really – if they can convince Biden to drop out, they will support whoever the candidate is, not Trump. And, if Biden stays in, then they will endorse him for president, not Trump. The question in this thread is whether they are pro-Trump – they aren’t.
Mostly the NYT is pro headlines that sell newspapers, and Biden dropping out is a good headline for that.
Of course they dont realize that after trump wins and they are in Gitmo, the amount of papers they sold is no longer relevant.
And bad news sells papers, this is why The Times’ coverage of the economy also seems biased against Biden. As we see a stunning economic turn-around, remarkable jobs reports and a stock market that’s breaking record after record, the Times coverage is suspect. Times columnist Paul Krugman recently told journalist Greg Sargent that he actually gets push back from Times editors when he writes a positive economic story. per Smapti cite.
No, too many MAGAs think trump is Jesus come again. And more likely it would be Haley- who is younger, but a (gasp) Female.
Are you paying attention? The NYT is anti-Biden specifically because it does not accept that this is a race where only two candidates can win. They want a non-specific third candidate to be the Democratic Party nominee.
They are not explicitly pro-Trump, but their non-stop Biden bashing is helping Trump.
I don’t know what they will do after the nomination is official, but right now, and for the last six months, they have helped Trump quite a bit. Even if they fully endorse Biden down the road, the damage is done.
I agree with this for sure. And, it’s not even the obvious anti-Biden stuff – it’s also downplaying good economic news, and probably other both-sides BS.
But, they are explicitly anti-Trump in their opinion pages, even their conservatives.
Politico maintains the NYT is anti-Biden because he won’t let them (Sulzberger) dictate the terms of how the White House/Times editorial board relationship works. An example they give is his failure to sit down for an interview with the board. The nerve!
For whatever reason, Team Biden has made a conscious decision or unable to come to agreeable terms to engage or sit for interviews. That’s completely fair.
By the same token, it is also fair that the NY Times does not have a first hand interview with President Biden to cite for a news article or op-ed countering that it is much ado about nothing.
And I’ll agree with everyone that says the Times is “anti Biden” but not “pro Trump.”
Hardly any swing voters read that newspaper. This goes double or triple for editorials.
Cheerleaders and verbal detractors are not the cause of wins and losses. Example: Trump won in 2016 with zero major newspaper editorials. Even the New York Post endorsed Clinton. Guess who won?
I get that this thread is about the New York Times. But papers all over the world are highlighting the Biden cognitive issue, for the good reason that it really is big news. Examples could be found from dozens of countries – this headline from the Times of India is at least as dismissive of President Biden as those in the New York Times:
