Uh-oh, NY Times being liberal again

The supposedly-liberal NY Times is trying to drive up its readership and ad revenue by promoting the idea that they are guardians of truth in a world of fake news. Apparently, getting the truth is “hard” and yet now more important than ever.

Screen Shot 2017-05-07 at 12.40.41 PM

Nice idea, but not something on which the NY Times is reliably acting. They are as much a part of the corporatist fake-balance centrism as any other non-right-wing outlet.

Consider this editorial bemoaning how both Trump and Clinton need to get past the election and allow the country to come together.  It is just the usual fake-balance false equivalence plus an apparent failure to recognize that, you know, Trump is president and Clinton is not.

Six months on, both Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton are still waging last year’s campaign, undermining their promises to help America heal.

… Nothing in recent history can match the sorry spectacle of a sitting president so desperate for adoration and so indifferent to actual governing that the only satisfaction he can get is from perpetuating the campaign.

Yet Mrs. Clinton, a person of greater substance, also seems unable to shake free. 

This week, in a conversation with Christiane Amanpour, the television journalist, Mrs. Clinton was asked about Mr. Trump’s approach to North Korea and Syria, and about women’s rights around the world. Her insights were strained by insinuations against the president, whom she still refers to as “my opponent.”

You see, they are both the same.  Trump is destroying America’s political institutions and Hillary is still referring to Trump as “my opponent.”  Six of one, half a dozen of the other.

In fairness, The truth ® is hard to insist upon when you need to worry about revenues.  This is why I always laugh when I hear the mainstream media has a “liberal” bias.


No, it has a get-revenues bias, which requires it to tell people mostly what they want to hear and to avoid pissing off the rich, in particular.