Posted on 06/05/2020 7:47:27 AM PDT by Kaslin
Within hours of publishing a column by a U.S. senator conveying an opinion held by a majority of Americans, The New York Times’ staff erupted in an outrage, calling their employer’s decision to print a differing opinion, “surreal and horrifying.”
The editorial page editor James Bennet at first defended running counter viewpoints by those in policy positions, but by Thursday, the New York Times fully relented, issuing an apology and blaming a “rushed editorial process” for its decision to run the op-ed at all.
The op-ed, written by Sen. Tom Cotton, R-Ark., called on the federal government to “send in the troops” to quell violent urban uprisings following the death of George Floyd. Times employees put out a public statement through their union-excoriating management for its “irresponsible choice” in publishing the column and for “promoting hate.” One NYT reporter claimed the article “[put] all black Americans in danger.”
Cotton responded to the Times’ “mea culpa” Thursday night on Fox News. “I can tell you my op-ed doesn’t meet The New York Times standards,” he told host Martha MacCallum. “It far exceeds their standards, which are normally full of left-wing sophomoric drivel. And I find it amazing that in the last 24 hours, the editor of The New York Times and the publisher of The New York Times have both defended their decision to publish this op-ed, but in the face of the ‘woke’ mob, of ‘woke’ kids that are in their newsroom, they tucked tail and they ran.”
Cotton is right that the New York Times editorial pages previously have published opinions and authors of a much lower standard, even “drivel” you could say. And yet, many of their most “surreal,” “horrifying,” or “dangerous” opinions have never been revoked, apologized for, or led to the expansion of their “fact-checking operation” like Cotton’s mainstream conservative op-ed has. Here are just a few examples of past opinions the paper of record has yet to apologize for:
In 1941, the New York Times Magazine published an excerpt from “Mein Kampf,” Adolf Hitler’s manifesto, under the title “The Art of Propaganda.”
In 2014, Vladmir Putin graced the same pages as Cotton, offering what the Times considers “counter-arguments” from America’s enemies.
So now it’s illegal to have an opposing opinion — even on the opinion page.
Where do we go from here? How does this end?
Nobody cares twhat the NYT publishes or doesn’t publish who cares. The little white p****** in their editorial room gave it more attention than most people would have seen in the 1st place.
Maybe they’ll compromise and give Cotton 3/5th’s a column next time.
Where do we go from here? How did we get gere!! The global social media platforms where these left wing Big Tech silence all conservatism. I mean basically you’re not allowed to have a conservative opinion in any public form apparently and if you do you’re doxed or called a white supremacist. understand the word white supremacy just means being a conservative or right of center.
“Where do we go from here? How does this end?”
If these people seize power, this is where it ends:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Killing_Fields
The New York Times standards is like a outhouse on a hot summer day.
It doesn’t end well. Because our side doesn’t fight back.
The next DNC administration will never lose power again...
A few in the past have criticized my choice of TAGLINE.
Once again, the TIMES have proven me accurate.
Thank, guys ( gals, too)
Where do we go from here? How does this end?
Ask Drew Breese
Didn’t they also publish a manifesto from Ted Kazinski? or was it Al Gore under a pen name?
Sure, it ended that way in Cambodia, Russia, Croatia, Germany, North Korea, and China...but they'll do it better this time!
bkmk
What about the one ‘I believe Tara Reade. But I’m still voting for Joe Biden’?
It was recent.
A few in the past have criticized my choice of TAGLINE.
A few times? Here? At FR?
I find that hard to believe.
To be really correct, I sort of often use my TAGLINE as a way to stick it to the TIMES, and ALWAYS I get a few replies in agreement, 90% in approval.
BUT, I felt I had to admit that not EVERY Freeper person is in full agreement.
I really enjoy sticking it to the TIMES and thanking them for making me look good.
Just wondering.
Also, let's not forget the recent cases where The Slimes changed their headlines because they appeared to lenient on President Trump.
Mark
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.