The New York Times Doesn’t Want Me (And Millions Of People Like Me) To Exist

Being opposed to racism, sexism, and discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation is not “political bias.”

These are universal human rights in 2019 and the leading news outlet in the world refuses to understand this. It is hurting the country and the world, and endangering people in the process.

The New York Times political coverage, under the leadership of Patrick Healy, published a piece that assesses Trump’s racist attack on the four Democratic congresswomen as merely a political tactic.

The piece was written by Stephanie Saul and Jeremy W. Peters.

Peters blocked me on Twitter after I pointed out he has a book deal to write about the conservative movement and was congratulated by Steve Bannon for the deal in video captured by Showtime.

(Nearly everybody who writes political stories at the New York Times has blocked me for criticizing the paper’s coverage.)

The piece and the accompanying promotion of the piece treats racial prejudice as it is merely another political issue.

That is how the Times usually handles these issues. In their hands, race – and gender and sexual orientation – is just another topic that goes back and forth between the left and the right and the Democratic and Republican parties.

In the Times’ view, those issues are just the same as left-right debates over taxation, surveillance, the size of government, and a host of issues where there are legitimate differences of opinion.

But on these core issues, there are not two morally equivalent sides. In America this was enshrined a long time ago with the Declaration that all men are “created equal.” The core story of this country has been the fight to make those words truer than the moment in which they are written.

The Times is the top target on the right for complaints about political bias and prejudice. In reaction to those complaints, which are largely made in bad faith and with fabricated evidence, the Times operates in a defensive crouch.

The paper is afraid to make waves on the right, and it avoids doing so by not rendering judgement. Instead objective reality is reduced to competing claims – the truth doesn’t matter.

But it does. Racism can’t just be a wedge strategy. It isn’t the same as Democrats pushing for a more expansive health care system and Republicans pushing for less regulation of guns.

The same is true of gender and sexual orientation. These are key to who we are and our very humanity. They are not up for debate. There are not competing and morally equivalent sides.

The New York Times has no right to reduce my existence – or that of millions of people – up to merely the home or away team in a contest.

The paper, if it is to have any moral standing in this world, must cover these issues without elevating hate and bigotry to the same level as our right to live.

As it currently operates, the Times has effectively put itself on the side of bigotry. To take no stance on racism is to indulge in the delusions of Nazism and the KKK.

In its obsession with evading conservative criticism, the New York Times abandons morality and decency. It throws basic humanity away so that it can live another day and generate profits.

“All the news that’s fit to print” becomes the anthem and creed of white supremacy.

%d bloggers like this: