Television critic James Poniewozik was featured on the front of the New York Times Arts section on Tuesday with another look by the paper at the “newly relevant” Hulu version of the feminist dystopian novel “The Handmaid’s Tale.” The Trump-baiting headline: "Making Dystopia Fresh Again -- Drawing on an Atwood novel that feels newly relevant." And another bogus lefty reference to current events is snuck in: Offred is a captive. Nevertheless, she persists...."
New York Times
Washington Free Beacon writer Stephen Gutwoski on Tuesday exposed the insanity of a New York Times op-ed complaining about all the guns in the National Rifle Association’s gun museum. Francis X Clines whined on Monday, “There are thousands of ingenious, gleaming rifles and handguns in displays about America's gun-rich history of colonialism, immigration, expansionism and vigilante justice.”
In case there was any doubt which side The New York Times favors when it comes to climate change opinions, the paper devoted three entire pages to “the effects of President Trump’s environmental policy.”
Just a day after Earth Day — on April 23 — the front page of the Sunday Review section of the Times featured an enormous graphic illustration of planet Earth and the headline “The Planet Doesn’t Have Time for This.” Beneath that, a subhead attacked President Donald Trump and warned the planet might “never recover” from his climate policies.
The New York Times is still treating FBI Director James Comey’s decision to reopen the case of Hillary Clinton’s emails as a leading factor in her loss. But the 7,500-word lead story in Sunday’s New York Times: “In Trying to Avoid Politics, Comey Shaped an Election – Behind-the-Scenes Handling of 2 Inquiries Thrust F.B.I. Into Center of Race” also contained a hidden “bombshell” that the Times should acknowledge to defend its own journalistic integrity against Democratic criticism.
Female genital mutilation (FGM) has unfortunately been in the news recently with the arrests of several people in Michigan allegedly involved in the practice. The World Health Organization has declared that FGM "is a violation of the human rights of girls and women." But, it has recently been learned, the New York Times won't use that term unless someone a reporter quotes uses it; otherwise, it's called "female genital cutting," — because, it turns out, one editor finds that term "less culturally loaded."
A Sunday item in the San Francisco Chronicle covered what reporter Justin Phillips has found is a major challenge for that city's restaurateurs. You see, many of them are struggling with how much virtue-signaling is appropriate in the wake of the election of Donald Trump and that city's defiant insistence on remaining an illegal-immigrant sanctuary. In light of a recent Harvard study on the effect of higher-than-market minimum wages and dismal jobs data from the government, restaurateurs and the press which covers this industry and several others need to look harder at another far more important issue: how many of these establishments will be unable to remain in business.
After a series of phony “hate crimes” supposedly inspired by Donald Trump’s election, the liberal media obsession with uncovering an epidemic of anti-immigrant violence in Trump’s America has died down somewhat. But on Monday, Geeta Anand reported from Mumbai that the coverage of alleged racial and ethnic attacks in the United States has had an effect -- though of course Anand blamed Trump, not her media colleagues: “For Indians, America Under Trump Is a Land of Vanished Opportunity."
If you want to read something crazy, look no further than the New York Times opinion section. The paper actually published an editorial Monday morning that outright denied free speech applied to anyone who wasn’t a liberal. In his appalling article, “What ‘Snowflakes’ Get Right About Free Speech,” New York University professor Ulrich Baer argued that conservatives are simply wrong about what free speech means, and that protesters who censored conservative or otherwise “offensive” guest speakers were actually protecting free speech.
Despite hopes that he would break with political precedent, Donald Trump failed to call the Armenian Genocide by name in today's commemoration of the atrocity. As the descendent of Armenian immigrants, I’m beyond disappointed. When government and media fail to label genocide with the “g-word,” it minimizes the calculating nature of the act. Sadly, there has been a trend in this direction.
New York Times Public Editor Liz Spayd is on a roll. Last week she criticized the paper’s op-ed page for its whitewash of an op-ed about a Palestinian hunger strike to protest supposedly arbitrary arrests by Israel. The paper failed to mention why contributor Marwan Barghouti was in prison: He was convicted of five counts of murder and membership in a terrorist organization. Her latest weekly column for the Sunday Review weighed how effectively the paper had burst its “hermetic bubble” in the first 100 days of the Trump administration: “New Voices, but Will They Be Heard?”
Since when does modern poetry make the front page? When it can be used to attack President Trump. The front of Saturday’s New York Times featured the breaking news that poets don’t like him. It's a convenient excuse to mainline left-wing anger straight onto the front of the paper, and proving it will leave no angle behind in its quest to denormalize the president: “American Poets, Refusing to Go Gentle, Rage Against the Right.”
As Nicholas Fondacaro at NewsBusters noted on Friday, MSNBC's Rachel Maddow's obsession with the money raised for President Donald Trump's inauguration went into overdrive the previous evening. During the same show, Maddow combined that obsession with another one shared by most of the news media — the absolute necessity to avoid blaming Venezuela's dire economic circumstances on its Bolivarian socialist form of government and its de facto dictator Nicolas Maduro — to come up with the most ridiculous reason imaginable as to why civil order in Venezuela has broken down.