Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr., publisher of The New York Times, and Dean Baquet, executive editor, issued their reflection to their readers. After reviewing it several times, I realized that the election of Donald J. Trump to the highest office in our country did much more than anyone could have anticipated. Not only did Trump fight the establishment, press and academia, and motivate American citizens to awaken from an eight-year period of fear and despair to demand a reversal of Obama’s executive orders, but he inspired the principals to make an unprecedented outreach to the public with a kind of desultory apology. They professed a purpose of rededication “to report to America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories…impartially and unflinchingly.” Although it was their use of biased analyses and writing assumptions over accuracies that diminished their readership, it is evident that they miss the point when they attempt to reassure their depleted readership that they can they can “rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage.” It is precisely that same coverage and same corruption that the American public will no longer tolerate.
Is it possible for a publisher and executive director to plan for a future without defining and owning up to the past? Will they re-educate the same staff writers who pandered to the establishment, the leftists and the globalists; the Soros- and Islamic-supported hatemongers of (BLM) Black Lives Matter, J-Street, (SJP) Students for Justice in Palestine and the (MSA) Muslim Student Association; the anti-Semitic revisionists; the corrupt elitists and academicians who delight in seeing their skewed views validated; the youths, immersed in socialism, who have been taught not how to think, but what to feel; and the populace that could not discern fact from propaganda?
Upon what standard lies were the Times readers nourished? When the Times repeatedly accused Israel of planning new “developments” northeast of Jerusalem that would allegedly split Judea-Samaria (West Bank), despite the map that was produced to prove the impossibility of their claim, a correction was never issued. When they claimed that singer-songwriter Eric Burdon was boycotting Israel, it was another falsehood not rescinded. When an article blamed Ariel Sharon’s entry into the Al Aqsa mosque in Jerusalem in 2000 for triggering the second intifada, he truth was that Sharon never entered the mosque and the second intifada was verified to have been planned in advance. When the Times repeatedly asserts that Gaza is occupied by Israel, but Israelis left in 2005 and Hamas is the sole occupier. When John Kerry spoke about brokering peace between Israel and Palestinians, and The New York Times amended it with a Palestinian narrative. Israel is routinely portrayed by the Times as being the obstacle to peace, while the Palestinians have consistently rejected all Israeli positions.