Posted on 08/27/2004 7:09:02 AM PDT by jmstein7
The New York Times Has Strong Ties to the Kerry Campaign
By Jonathan M. Stein
The New York Times, which advertises itself as containing “All The News That’s Fit To Print” – a slogan that suggests objectivity – has myriad and dubious financial and political ties to John Kerry’s presidential campaign. These links between Kerry and the Times seriously call into question the objectivity of that allegedly impartial media outlet – an outlet with enormous power and influence over public opinion.
According to major news outlets, including the New York Times, the fact that a major Republican donor has contributed money to the group known as the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth calls into question the impartiality of that group and ties it to the Republicans. If that is indeed the case – that an exchange of funds between an entity and a partisan contributor dispositively links the entity to a partisan cause – then, by their own logic, the New York Times is unquestionably linked to the Kerry campaign and other far-left groups. To understand the severe implications of such a link, one must fully comprehend the power and reach of the New York Times.
As of March of 2004, the Times had a total circulation volume of 1,133,763 copies daily. However, the circulation volume of the paper itself does not reflect the paper’s total impact on the marketplace of information. The New York Times Company publishes The New York Times, The Boston Globe and 16 other newspapers; owns eight network-affiliated television stations and two New York radio stations; and has more than 40 Web sites, including NYTimes.com and Boston.com. Columns appearing in the NYT are syndicated throughout this extensive media network. Further, network and cable news anchors tend to lead with stories substantively taken from the front page of the NYT. Thus, the reach of the NYT and its incalculable power to influence the marketplace of information and ideas evince a media juggernaut beyond that of any other single information source in existence. More salient, though, is the fact that the Times, as an alleged media outlet, escapes regulation under McCain-Feingold campaign finance reform.
The network of financial connections between the Kerry campaign and the Times is extensive. Although the New York Times has an allegedly official “ban” on political campaign contributions, a simple search on “opensecrets.org” reveals that at least two editors in the employ of the New York Times, Christine Muhlke and Elizabeth Stewart, have personally contributed at least $1,500 to John Kerry’s campaign efforts. These are individuals who have direct influence on the selection of stories that run in the Times and its companion magazine – and they are on the record giving money out of their own pockets directly to the Kerry campaign. At least two other employees of the Times – Alan Flippen and William Usuik – have contributed another $1,250 to John Kerry. Alternatively, not a single employee of the Times has contributed to President Bush or any other Republican candidate or organization. This fact, i.e. the fact that influential individuals working for the New York Times have contributed money directly to John Kerry, and John Kerry alone, is quite troubling and seriously calls into question the objectivity of that news outlet. Further, the financial connection between John Kerry, the Democrats, and the New York Times goes beyond mere employees.
The New York Times Company is effectively owned and controlled by the Sulzberger family. At lease one Sulzberger family member, Dr. Judith P. Sulzberger (who owns, de jure, approximately five-percent of the New York Times voting shares, or over about seven million shares), has donated the maximum ($2,000) directly to John Kerry (on March 8, 2004). Dr. Sulzberger has also contributed $5,000 to “Victory Campaign 2004” (which finds radical leftist 527 groups such as Americans Coming Together and The Media Fund) and $20,000 to the Democrat National Committee (DNC Services Corp.). So, in the aggregate, an individual exercising de jure ownership/control over the New York Times Company has donated in excess of $27,000 to John Kerry and other far-left efforts to defeat the President.
The New York Times, in major stories, has used donor-donee connections to call into question the credibility and objectivity of the Swift Boat Veterans for Truth. Therefore, in all fairness, the same standard should be applied to the Times in assessing its credibility and objectivity. When applied to the New York Times, the financial connections between that media outlet, John Kerry, and other far-left groups organized to defeat the President raises serious doubts about the objectivity and credibility of the Times itself.
You need a graph, just like the NY Times.
Donations after a certain date (to candidates that have take the Federal campaign money, which both Kerry and Bush have) must go to the Committee, not the candidate.
You forgot the fact that the Executive Editor, Bill Keller, is married to Emma Gilbey, former girlfriend of John F'n Kerry.
Well done!! Your work is always a pleasure to read.
Great work! Thanks.
Excellent.
Evidently the wife of one of the editors of NYT dated Kerry.
Good point. Public Relations agencies hire clipping services to measure in inches the amount of good press their clients get and charge accordingly. Those inches have monetary value. The NYT is effectively Kerry's PR agency, and the value of those blatantly biased inches of copy are a campaign contribution.
One of these days we may find out that the elite lunatic libs who own and control the NY Slimes, Chicago Tribune/La Slimes, Washington Compost, USA Lies Today and of course ABCNNBC BS really control the Rat party instead of the Rat Party controlling them.
They should STATE this in their newspaper so that their readers can fairly assess their editorials and news.
This is so very sad.
They have a right to contribute as American citizens...but the fact that NONE of their other associates have contributed to the Republican Party, according to the above article, suggests that something is VERY UNBALANCED at the NYT!
LOL What a surprise! < /sarcasm >
What really needs to be done is every conservative subscriber to the Ny Slimes and other vile left wing needs to cancel their subscription.
Then send half of their monthly savings to the SwiftVets and Free Republic.
Then each month send a copy of their cancellation and donations to the Swift Vets and Free Republic to the board of these lunatic mediots. Tell the board that their vile bias forced you to cancel. Then send a copy to the board of the biggest advertisers with these vile organs, and then tell them they are not reaching you with their ad $'s.
Just one heck of a GREAT IDEA!
Good Job...
You that man, Jon. Keep up the great work!
Great work, jm. Now that this is being carried by Newsmax, you should ask for the source and website links up above to be updated, edited.
The larger truth is that the New York Times is the bastion of liberalism and is the chief opponent of GW Bush in this election.
The financial ties are obvious from your article and probably much deeper if one could frequent the smoke-filled back rooms of this self-proclaimed america's aristocracy.
Maybe you could do the same for the Boston Globe.
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.
