The New York Times

You gotta spin it to win it
Media

Stop the presses!

* Reason (magazine)
* Lawrence O'Donnell
* Oak Island money pit
* RT
* TheBlaze
* Gamergate
* Chuck Harder
* The Daily Caller
* Subliminal messages

We want pictures
of Spider-Man!

* Journalism
* Newspapers
* All articles

Extra! Extra!

* WIGO World

v \- t \- e

“”New rallying cry on the right: "Even the liberal New York Times agrees that climate change is debatable."

—Bruce Bartlett[1]

The New York Times, a.k.a. the Wordle Picayune,[2] (All the News That's Fit to Print™), depending on who you ask, is either a ragsheet run by commies, an obnoxious paywalled establishment ragsheet that is everything wrong with major American news outlets, or a winner of over a hundred Pulitzer Prizes.[3] The Times is best known for its crossword puzzle and for Paul Krugman, both of which send secret messages (through clues and op-ed columns, respectively) that only liberals can understand properly.

If someone is scanning the Times in public, you can be sure they're either a deceitful liberal, or a good conservative checking out what liberals are up to. Someone who laughs while reading the Times is a liberal, as no conservative would ever find the un-American, Muslim-loving articles humorous!

The Times also is widely read at many universities and environmental organizations. When visiting these locations, make sure to keep low by hiding your Wall Street Journal inside the front pages of the Times.

## Contents

* 1 In reality
* 2 Iraq War coverage
* 3 Holodomor coverage
* 4 Flubs on discrimination
* 4.1 Slavery and segregation
* 4.2 Adolf Hitler, and the Holocaust
* 4.3 Anti-LGBT discrimination
* 5 See also
* 5.1 Columnists we have articles on
* 6 External links
* 7 Notes
* 8 References

## In reality[edit]

While the crazies over at the Media Research Center have accused the Times of having a liberal bias,[4] there have been several instances where the paper has blatantly supported neoconservative policies. For instance, in the wake of Iran-Contra, one editor acknowledged that the Times frequently adhered to the Reagan administration strategy of heavily reporting on human rights abuses in Nicaragua by the leftist Sandinista government as a means to support the right-wing Contras. At the same time, the newspaper usually ignored worse cases by other Central American governments supported by the Reagan administration.[5] More recently, Clark Hoyt, public editor for the Times, steadfastly refused to issue corrections for a discredited story involving the ACORN pimp hoax.[6]

It may be more reasonable to say that if the paper of today has any actual bias, it trends toward American exceptionalism and preserving the establishment status quo, rather than toward any broad political ideology. After all, the same newspaper which once published The Pentagon Papers now sidelines the release of leaked Afghan War documents in favor of personal attacks on WikiLeaks founder Julian Assange.[7] The Times' coverage of the leaks was strikingly suspect when compared with other media outlets; the paper chose to focus on doing its best to make sure the US didn't look bad, and refused to admit the documents showed that government officials had ever lied about anything.[8] Following the same lines, it also led the charge on not calling waterboarding torture when it was being done by the US,[9] while at the same time not caring to be pedantic when it came to the same abuses done by others.[10] It finally made a rule change in 2014.[11]

Media Bias/Fact Check lists The New York Times as left-center.[12]

Ironically for a paper constantly accused of left-wing bias, the Times started out life as a Republican paper, and during the New York Draft Riots of 1863 an attack on their office was averted by staff, including the paper's founder Henry Jarvis Raymond, manning Gatling guns mounted on the roof.[13]

The New York Times has also published articles that are sympathetic to astrology and other pseudosciences.[14][15][16][17] (Most of these are in the ~~Woo~~ Style section.) In fact, they have a whole column dedicated to this deceit.[18] To be fair, they also publish pieces from pseudoscience critics.[19][20]

The Times has also been caught publishing Zionist hasbara disguised as legitimate investigative journalism in 2024.[21] This propaganda disguised as reporting received internal criticism from within The Times as well.[21] The writer of the article, Anat Schwartz, had no prior investigative journalistic experience and there were concerns that her "reporting" may have been marred by her bigotry against Palestinians.[21] When The Times tried turning the piece into a podcast episode, it ultimately wasn't aired as it failed a fact check.[21]

## Iraq War coverage[edit]

The most notable controversy the paper has faced was that centering on its coverage leading up to the Iraq War.[22] Especially troublesome were stories backing the American government's position on WMD's in Iraq, authored prominently by reporter Judith Miller.[23] Miller's articles, which more or less echoed the claims of Bush administration officials, were then cited by those very same officials as justifications for war. Truthiness in motion, you could say.

Not to be outdone, fellow Times journalist Thomas Friedman backed the war effort to the extreme, repeatedly asserting (contrary to the reality on the ground) that all was well, and that we were likely to see the end of the conflict somewhere within the next six months. So widely criticized was the Times coverage on Iraq, they even had to print a half-hearted apology when all was said and done.[24]

Despite all of the above, the New York Times does manage to produce some high quality journalism. The Times has won 130 Pulitzer Prizes as of May 2021. However, about one of those prizes...

## Holodomor coverage[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Holodomor

Coverage by the Times about Iraq renewed attention in 2003 towards the Pulitzer Prize that was awarded seventy years earlier to Times correspondent Walter Duranty.[25]

Contemporary with the Holodomor in which millions of Ukrainians (and over one million Russians) starved to death under Joseph Stalin's administration of the Soviet Union, the Times printed apologia for the Soviet government written by Duranty, who reflected "the official opinion of the Soviet regime".[25] Duranty used his influential post at the Times to defend Joseph Stalin and Soviet authoritarianism, including in stories that appeared on the front-page of the Times.[25] Denying the ongoing Holodomor famine, Duranty claimed in 1933 there was instead an "excellent harvest" and "any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda." According to a British diplomat, Duranty knew this was a lie and acknowledged in private that millions had died from the famine.[25] Duranty, who was seemingly motivated to advance his career in journalism rather than to advance communism or to receive bribes from the Soviet government, received a Pulitzer Prize for that reporting.[25] It wasn't until the 1980s, five decades later, that the Times began to seriously criticize Duranty's work. There have since been pressure campaigns for the Times and the Pulitzer board to renounce Duranty's prize in journalism for his coverage of the Holodomor.[25] As of 2022, "The Times still lists Duranty among its Pulitzer winners. Even so, as Keller says, the newspaper has distanced itself from what Duranty wrote in its pages."[25]

## Flubs on discrimination[edit]

### Slavery and segregation[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Slavery

In January 1859, the Times published an article proposing:

> The very best thing that could possibly be done towards the abolition of Slavery would be for the North to stop talking about it. … Though, in our judgement, silence on on the part of the North concerning Slavery would be the best conceivable policy, there is not one chance in ten thousand that it will be adopted. … The Slavery question will continue to be discussed in the North; Abolitionists will continue to denounce, menace and alarm the South … Emancipation, if it ever comes under such circumstances, will come like a thief in the night … the result of some bloody catastrophe, and do more harm than good to everybody concerned.[26]

The paper's gradualist flag flies high here.

Somewhat similar is an article from June 1961 about the Freedom Riders of the civil rights movement. Then, the Times argued:

> The Freedom Riders ought not to be enjoined by the courts from exercising their Constitutional rights. But, as we have urged before, the Freedom Riders should realize they have made their point and voluntarily cease their activities for a period during which the passions aroused by their recent efforts may subside. A similar position on this issue was taken last week by the Southern Regional Council, which is composed of both white and Negro liberals. The Council is entirely correct in advocating that the advantages gained be not pressed too far. The issue of desegregation can ultimately be solved only in the South and primarily by Southerners, white and Negro. Neither violence nor the steadily insistent provocation of violence can bring about the solution."[27]

### Adolf Hitler, and the Holocaust[edit]

See the main article on this topic: Holocaust

In 1922, The Times first reported on Adolf Hitler:

> Several reliable, well-informed sources confirmed the idea that Hitler's antisemitism was not so genuine or violent as it sounded, and that he was merely using antisemitic propaganda as a bait to catch masses of followers and keep them aroused, enthusiastic, and in line for the time when his organization is perfected and sufficiently powerful to be employed effectively for political purposes.

That may have been a bit wrong.

As reported by The Times itself in 1996, The Times "…grievously underplayed the Holocaust while it was going on."[28][29]:19-191 The Times was not alone in this among major media outlets,[28] but it was particularly disconcerting since at the time, The Times was published by a religious Jew, Arthur O. Sulzberger, Sr. Even in the immediate aftermath of World War II, Sulzberger gave a speech in 1946 in which he partly blamed Zionist Jews for the Holocaust:

> It is my judgment that thousands now dead might be alive, and in Palestine as well, had there been through the past fifty years more emphasis upon George Washington’s great conception [of religious tolerance] and less on statehood.[29]:320

Holocaust denial can take several forms, and include minimizing the impact of the Holocaust and blaming the Jews for their own genocide.[30]

### Anti-LGBT discrimination[edit]

Homophobia at the Times was intense under A. M. Rosenthal (executive editor of the paper from 1977–1986), who is known to have personally hated gay people.[31][32][33] (His tombstone says "HE KEPT THE PAPER STRAIGHT".[33]) The New York Times during that period largely prohibited using "gay" as a synonym for "homosexual, lacked coverage of gay experiences,[34] and was accused of homophobia multiple times by a gay community newspaper in New York City, the New York Native.[35][note 1] On the 1981 cover of issue 13 for the Native was an article titled "Homophobia at the New York Times", written by David Rothenberg, which said that while there were gay people working at the Times, they were often in the closet to help their careers.[37][38] The Times published an early report on AIDS, though it was not the first and it incorrectly said the disease posed no threat to non-homosexual people.[31][39]

Some commentators draw a parallel or connection between historic coverage of gay people by the Times and later coverage of transgender people.[33][40] In an analysis of Times coverage of nationwide anti-trans legislation from February 2023 to February 2024, Media Matters for America in association with GLAAD found that two-thirds of articles on the subject did not include the perspective of any trans people. Eighteen percent of the articles also included anti-trans misinformation.[41] The paper's coverage of transgender people has been criticized by ~1,200[40][42] of its own writers, which management had a sour response to, saying it would "not be tolerated"; this was because the letter calling attention to the problem had named specific examples, which management interpreted as an attack on colleagues.[43] Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) compared the Times coverage of transgender topics to that of The Washington Post (in the 2022–2023 period), judging the Post to have better coverage while stating they "both have a recent history of ceding the framework of their trans coverage to the right wing, as a political football rather than an attack on trans people's right to bodily autonomy and self-determination."[44]

GLAAD argued the Times is biased against trans people to the point of their articles on the topic area being inaccurate, citing (for example) their mostly-uncritical repetition of inaccurate statements by anti-trans politicians, and testimony by families interviewed by the Times who said their "personal stories were spun and twisted". GLAAD also points out that the Times had "covered Utah's legislative attacks against the transgender community in more than half a dozen stories, but did not cover the Utah legislature's study finding that transgender health care benefits trans youth."[45] This refers to a study with an unexpected result that was published in May 2025 and also contradicts some Times claims about the evidence base for trans medicine.[46][47] GLAAD also stated:

“”The Times' coverage has been cited by multiple anti-LGBTQ politicians to justify legalizing discrimination and criminalizing support for transgender people, a fact the Times itself has never covered. A recent example: a wildly inaccurate and graphic Department of Justice memo seeking to criminalize health care providers included as its number one citation an inflammatory article from the New York Times boosting the debunked theory about the rise in transgender youth, alongside dubious sources including The New York Post, Fox News, and error and animus-filled documents from the Trump White House.

—[45]

## See also[edit]

* CNN
* New York Post
* Wall Street Journal
* The Washington Post

### Columnists we have articles on[edit]

* The Krug
* The Bobo
* The Moustache of Understanding
* The Chunky Reese Witherspoon

## External links[edit]

* New York Times
* USA Today, another liberal rag.
* LA Times, a lesser-known copycat propagandist tool.
* Track the historical use of words in the Times
* Track revisions to articles from popular news sites, most notably the Times
* Lulz: NYT's critical review of (pro-Times and well-received) doc Page One: Inside The New York Times

## Notes[edit]

1. ↑ Though nothing hinges on the Native's accusation now since Rosenthal's homophobia is at this point historical record, this gives us some sense that it was somewhat known at the time. The New York Native later descended into HIV/AIDS denialism and other crankery.[36]

## References[edit]

1. ↑ Bruce Bartlett (April 29, 2017). Archived from the original on September 9, 2023. Twitter.
2. ↑ The New York Times and Anti-Anti-Fascism: On the burdens of solidarity. by Jonathan V. Last (Sep 19, 2025) The Bulwark.
3. ↑ See the Wikipedia article on List of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times., as it keeps increasing every year
4. ↑ For example, the MRC operates a website critical of the newspaper, TimesWatch.org.
5. ↑ Questionnaire for the New York Times on Its Central America Coverage, Extra!: January/February 1988.
6. ↑ NYT and the ACORN Hoax
7. ↑ The Times channels the Nixon administration
8. ↑ NYT vs. the world: WikiLeaks coverage
9. ↑ "From the 1930s to 1999 the New York Times described waterboarding as torture 81% of the time; from 2002 to 08, 1.4%" - Yep
10. ↑ NYT and “torture”: Searching for a justification
11. ↑ The NYT is calling CIA torture "torture" now that it's too late to do anything about it
12. ↑ Media Bias/Fact Check entry on The New York Times
13. ↑ "On This Day: August 1, 1863" \- NYT Student Connections Page
14. ↑ https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/06/the-new-york-times-coverage-of-wellness-concepts-like-detox-is-a-case-study-in-pseudoscience-creep.html
15. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/20/style/kiernan-shipka-sabrina-netflix.html
16. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/01/t-magazine/food/isabella-capece-galeota-cafe-maisie-juice-recipe.html
17. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/01/style/what-are-adaptogens.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/fashion
18. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/column/my-detox
19. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/12/22/what-is-the-appeal-of-astrology/the-trap-of-confirmation-bias?module=inline
20. ↑ https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/11/nyregion/11mercury.html
21. ↑ 21.0 21.1 21.2 21.3 "The Story Behind the New York Times October 7 Exposé" \- The Intercept. Written by Jeremy Scahill, Ryan Grim, and Daniel Boguslaw (February 28, 2024). Archived version here.
22. ↑ How Chalabi and the White House held the front page
23. ↑ The Great WMD Hunt, Extra!: July/August 2003.
24. ↑ NYT "Apology"
25. ↑ 25.0 25.1 25.2 25.3 25.4 25.5 25.6 David Folkenflik (May 8, 2022). "'The New York Times' can't shake the cloud over a 90-year-old Pulitzer Prize". NPR.
26. ↑ (January 19, 1859). "The Abolition of Slavery" (PDF). The New York Times. (Alternative link).
27. ↑ (June 4, 1961). "Injunction in Alabama". The New York Times.
28. ↑ 28.0 28.1 $5.5 Billion Missing by A. M. Rosenthal (Sept. 24, 1996) The New York Times (archived from March 24, 2020).
29. ↑ 29.0 29.1 Buried by the Times: the Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper by Laurel Leff (2005) Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521812879.
30. ↑ Working Definition of Holocaust Denial and Distortion International Holocaust Remembrance.
31. ↑ 31.0 31.1 Charles Kaiser (September 26, 2023). "'Rather devastating': how the New York Times came to terms with Aids". The Guardian.
32. ↑ Jack Shafer (May 11, 2006). "A.M. Rosenthal (1922-2006)". Slate.
33. ↑ 33.0 33.1 33.2 Jack Mirkinson (February 20, 2023). "The New York Times Is Repeating One of Its Most Notorious Mistakes". The Nation.
34. ↑ David W. Dunlap (June 19, 2017). "How The Times Gave 'Gay' Its Own Voice (Again)". The New York Times.
35. ↑ David Rothenberg (1981). "Media Watch". Issue 4, page 7.
36. ↑ See the Wikipedia article on New York Native.
37. ↑ David Rothenberg (1981). "Homophobia at the New York Times". The New York Native. Issue 13, pages 1 and 14.
38. ↑ Wallace, Lewis Raven (2023). The View from Somewhere: Undoing the Myth of Journalistic Objectivity. University of Chicago Press. pp. 108–109\. ISBN 978-0-226-82658-5.108-109&rft.pub=University+of+Chicago+Press&rft.date=2023&rft.isbn=978-0-226-82658-5&rft.aulast=Wallace&rft.aufirst=Lewis+Raven&rft_id=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_View_from_Somewhere/BYqsEAAAQBAJ&rfr_id=info:sid/rationalwiki.org:The+New+York+Times" class="Z3988">
39. ↑ Ted Kerr (July 2, 2020). "39 Years Later, The New York Times’ 1981 ‘Gay Cancer’ Story Continues to Distort Early AIDS History". TheBody.
40. ↑ 40.0 40.1 NYT Letter.
41. ↑ Seen but not heard: The New York Times failed to quote trans people in two-thirds of stories on anti-trans legislation in a one-year period: From February 15, 2023, through February 15, 2024, another 18% of such articles included anti-trans misinformation with no fact-checking (03/26/24 10:01 AM EDT) Media Matters for America.
42. ↑ Ein Gastbeitrag von Jo Livingstone (March 8, 2023). "This is not about the 'New York Times'". Die Zeit.
43. ↑ Dominick Mastrangelo (February 16, 2023). "NYT editors: Paper 'will not tolerate' its journalists protesting coverage of transgender people". The Hill.
44. ↑ Julie Hollar (May 11, 2023). "NYT's Anti-Trans Bias—by the Numbers". Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting.
45. ↑ 45.0 45.1 (June 5, 2025). "The New York Times Continues to Double Down on Biased, Inaccurate Transgender Coverage". GLAAD.
46. ↑ Emily Anderson Stern (May 22, 2025). "Utah lawmakers’ own study found gender-affirming care benefits trans youth. Will they lift the treatment ban?". FOX 13.
47. ↑ Evan Urquhart (May 27, 2025). "Plentiful Data, No Regret: What the Utah Review on Youth Trans Care Found". Assigned Media.