John Stossel of Fox News penned a column titled “I Hate The New York Times.” Stossel says he reads the Times because "my neighbors read it, and I need to understand what they think. Sadly, many think dumb things because most every day the Times runs deceitful, biased stories and headlines that mislead."
He provided a list of examples of recent offenses:
A recent headline said that that President Trump's tweets had "united Britain in outrage." Wow. Really? The whole country?
Only if you read the entire story would you learn that the outraged people include "the opposition Labour party," "several" Conservatives and comedian John Cleese.
That's a whole country "united in Trump outrage"? Please.
Another headline said ending President Obama's net neutrality bureaucracy would be "hastening the Internet's death."
Ridiculous. I understand that many statists like the regulation, but all the net neutrality repeal really will do is restore some of the permissionless innovation that allowed the internet to blossom in the first place.
Yet the continuation of the Times story carried the headline "So long to the internet."
Give me a break. That's just irresponsible scaremongering.
When the liberals don't get what they want, they overdramatize. A tax cut is "the end of the world," and scrapping net-neutrality rules is the end of the Internet. Republicans are always wreaking havoc and destruction, at least when you hear the Times describe it:
Now that the Republicans' tax bill passed the House and Senate, some legislators say they will try to reform entitlements.
Yes! Finally! This is a responsible thing to do. But Times reporters hate Republicans so much that they twisted this new effort at reform into a headline that said: "Next objective -- cut the safety net."
That is just a smear.
Stossel found it funny that the liberal Times is so critical of wealthy people and at the same time fills its pages with ads for lavish properties and commodities. He also pointed at a gushy intereview of rap star Jay-Z by Times executive editor Dean Baquet. Stossel wrote “Baquet didn't criticize the rapper for living in an $80 million mansion but instead asked him penetrating questions like, ‘Would you rather be a trend? Or Ralph Lauren?’"
Meanwhile, the Times celebrated the clothes of the "Antifa" movement as they destroy property in the war on capitalism:
But this week's most disgusting feature was a nearly full-page "Style" section profile of black-clad Antifa thugs. The Times made them sound fashionable and fun as they punch people who aren't looking for any physical fight, just spouting their beliefs.
The headline: "What to Wear to Smash the State."
The Times explained what a stylish vandal wears: "Black work or military boots, pants, balaclavas or ski masks, gloves and jackets, North Face brand ... makes it easier for saboteurs to take the offensive against storefronts..."
Gee, thanks, New York Times. I doubt that you'd be so enthusiastic about property destruction if the "saboteurs ... take the offensive against" your storefront.