The Sins of the Gray Lady

Readers of the New York Times know the news may change, but the message is always the same in their paper of record. It will play up every Republican kerfuffle and downplay Democratic scandals while presenting the choice between the two parties as a Manichean struggle between good and evil. Now clad in rainbow colors, the Gray Lady will, in the name of inclusion, celebrate a wide range of heretofore marginal behaviors – homosexuality, polyamory and transgenderism – while sowing divisions by separating Americans into warring camps based on race, gender, and ethnicity.

The transformation of the Times, and much of American journalism, during the last decade from a traditional newspaper that largely reports the news into the daily call sheet for the “woke” revolution that seeks to undermine the traditional pillars of American society is now so complete that it may seem unremarkable. Both its defenders and critics know exactly what to expect when they open its pages. Such acceptance, or resignation, is dangerous because it normalizes the great sin of the New York Times: the betrayal of hitherto bedrock journalistic principles of fairness, objectivity and pluralism that made the Fourth Estate a pillar of American democracy during the 20th century.

"[A] traditional newspaper that largely reports the news ..." (!)

This long article is a subtle apology for the nyt. It acknowledges some of the nyt’s dishonesty, but then provides excuses for and minimizes it.

This article claims that “The paper’s radical reinvention of itself into a results-oriented tool serving leftwing social change has happened quickly …” -- during the past decade, according to the article. This is false. The nyt has been a left-wing propaganda organ for generations.

The article claims that the nyt “is, by far, the most influential news outlet in the United States …” False again. First, the nyt is not a “news outlet.” Second, the nyt is only influential among a coterie of “elite” “opinion leaders” who only talk to each other.

The article is full of excuses and minimizations. “In fairness to the Times ….” “Yes, the Times has always had a liberal bias … But its recent turn is different ….”

The article employs a strategy similar to the “limited hangout.” By criticizing some of the most egregious recent crimes, the article seeks to legitimize the nyt’s long-standing, less obvious subversion of the American republic.

By referring to the nyt as “the Gray Lady,” and as doing “journalism,” the article tries to portray the nyt as a legitimate institution that recently has gone bad (and might someday recover). This is false. Never in the memory of the living has the nyt been a legitimate institution.

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.