Media not hackish enough for Biden White House.
When will The New York Times finally stop pulling punches and go after Donald Trump?
This is the question Joe Biden’s campaign asked this week. The White House is urging the political press corp, especially The New York Times, to step up and inform the electorate about the potential consequences of allowing Trump back in the White House.
The New York Times is, indeed, a friend. It consistently meets the moment and informs the public. So, Biden’s request is not about working the refs, but rather demanding responsible journalism. However, the fact that the White House can openly ask a supposedly free press to join their campaign effort reveals the contemporary Democrat’s disregard for a free press.
On rare occasions when the Times makes an honest headline, it faces pressure from celebrity journalism ”professors” and leftist Twitterati to change it. More often than not, the Times complies. This time won’t be an exception.
In this instance, the White House wasn’t even requesting a correction of a factual error. Biden was upset that the Times published an article that made a banal observation about Trump and abortion.
In a piece titled “Why Trump Seems Less Vulnerable Than Other Republicans,” Ruth Igielnik points out that existing polling data suggests Trump has effectively neutralized abortion as an issue during the Republican primary. The article highlights Trump’s vagueness and attempts to occupy a middle ground on the topic.
This is an undeniable fact. Trump, despite his bluster, is perhaps the most ideologically moderate and adaptable major Republican candidate in a long time. He has taken various positions on abortion throughout his political career. While he has nominated constitutionalist jurists, he now criticizes Florida’s pro-life law as a “terrible mistake.”
Since Trump already has a significant lead in the polls and is running a general election campaign, he can moderate his positions, just like any other candidate.
If The New York Times were truly informing the electorate, it would highlight that Joe Biden, a devout Catholic, supports unrestricted access to abortion. However, the narrative pushed by the Times is that radical abortion bans are hurting the GOP nationally, and the White House demands this notion be promoted at all times.
Once the left stopped debating and proclaimed themselves guardians of “democracy,” they felt justified in acting undemocratically. The left widely believes that campaigning for Biden to save the nation is more important than traditional journalism.
Recently, John Harwood, formerly a journalist at NBC, stated that the media has a duty to convey two realities: that the US economy is doing well and that Biden, at 80, is effectively handling the job. However, these contentions are debatable, and such debates should be left to pundits. Harwood, like celebrity “journalism” professors and institutions that produce activists instead of skeptical reporters, believes he has a higher purpose than allowing voters to form their own opinions.
This is why the White House not only feels comfortable demanding the press to help win a presidential election but also directs private outlets to censor speech and establishes a Ministry of Truth to combat alleged “misinformation” and threaten non-compliant individuals.
As for what the White House might “look like” if Trump returns, it could be described as insane. There is a possibility that Trump, like Biden, would bypass the legislative branch, abuse executive power, disregard the Supreme Court, force Americans to pay off strangers’ loans, send billions of dollars to an Iranian terror state, target political enemies with the Justice Department, and expect journalists to act as stenographers for the White House.
Hopefully, that won’t be the case.
rnrn
How has The New York Times demonstrated a lack of unbiased and responsible journalism in its coverage of Donald Trump and his actions?
Opagated. This is a clear example of how The New York Times is failing to provide unbiased and responsible journalism.
The role of the media is to inform the public and hold those in power accountable. Unfortunately, The New York Times has been hesitant to fully scrutinize Donald Trump and his actions. Despite the numerous controversies and scandals surrounding his presidency, the Times has often shied away from taking a strong stance against him.
Joe Biden’s call for The New York Times to go after Trump is not an unreasonable request. As a candidate for the presidency, Biden understands the importance of informing the electorate about the potential consequences of another Trump term. The White House’s support for this call highlights the urgency of the situation.
However, it is disconcerting that the White House feels comfortable openly asking the press to join their campaign effort. This reveals a disregard for the fundamental principles of a free press. In a democracy, the press should be free from interference and pressure from political entities. They should be able to report accurately and objectively without fear of reprisal.
Unfortunately, The New York Times has faced pressure in the past to change headlines or articles that do not align with certain narratives. This shows a lack of journalistic integrity and a willingness to compromise the truth for the sake of appeasing certain groups.
The recent case regarding Trump and abortion is a prime example of the Times bowing to outside pressure. Instead of standing by the article that made a valid observation about Trump’s stance on the issue, the Times will most likely comply with Biden’s request to downplay it. This not only undermines the credibility of the Times but also hinders the public’s access to important information.
Trump’s ability to adapt his positions and moderate his stance on various issues, including abortion, is an undeniable fact. The Times should be highlighting this as it is crucial information for voters. Joe Biden’s support for unrestricted access to abortion as a devout Catholic is another significant point that should be acknowledged. By only focusing on one side of the narrative, the Times fails to provide the electorate with a well-rounded view of the candidates.
It is time for The New York Times to step up and fulfill its role as a responsible and unbiased source of news. The public deserves to be informed and educated about the potential consequences of another Trump presidency. It is crucial that the Times does not succumb to pressure and continues to report truthfully and objectively. Only then can the electorate make informed decisions that will shape the future of our nation.
" Conservative News Daily does not always share or support the views and opinions expressed here; they are just those of the writer."
*As an Amazon Associate I earn from qualifying purchases
Now loading...