The New York Times' Hyperpartisan, Reality-Denying Cheerleading for Obama and the Democrat Party Harms Political Discourse, Destroys Informed Consent

@benk84 linked this in the news dump. I think it's worth reading in full.

After the president’s repeated promise that “If you like your health-care plan, you can keep it” was proven false, the editorial page tried to clean up his mess. On Nov. 2, it charged that Republicans were stoking “consumer fears and confusion” by highlighting reports of people losing insurance.

Then came the coverup: “Mr. Obama clearly misspoke” when he made those promises, the editorial said, before dismissing the problems as an “overblown controversy.”

The “misspoke” defense set off a firestorm, and even the paper’s gentle public editor suggested it was too kind. Naturally, the editors defended their decision not to accuse the president of an outright lie.

Yet even Obama concluded he had to apologize....

The episode graphically illustrates how the Times has harmed the nation by reflexively protecting Obama, facts be damned.

Instead of just expressing its own liberal views, the editorial page serves as the propaganda arm of the administration, the Jay Carney of print media. Its daily drumbeat of shrill partisanship leaves it indistinguishable from Dem party hacks who spend their waking hours demonizing Republicans.

...

This power to shape the narrative is not limited to its own pages. The newspaper’s brand still commands sufficient cachet that stories it downplays — such as the Benghazi terror attack or IRS targeting of conservative groups — quickly disappear from other ­media as well. And that lets the president off the hook and keeps much of the public in the dark.

At least that was the pattern ­until now. ObamaCare is such a direct hit on so many people that it could change everything.

Most of The Q is taking Veterans Day off, as I am. So it will be sort of a half-day, with short links like this and open threads.

posted by Ace at 11:41 AM

| Access Comments