Has the NY Times learned anything?

Surviving the Jason Blair debacle would seem to have taught the editors at the esteemed paper a few things. Recent events indicate otherwise.

I am not Catholic but there is much to respect in the life of Pope John Paul II. His death is a great loss and appropriately brings sadness to the hearts of many. The way the NY Times covered his death is quite illuminating especially when contrasted with an article about Senator Robert (Sheets) Byrd.

Power Line has the report:

Pope John Paul II died this afternoon. The New York Times reports on his papacy in an article that inadvertently tells us more than the Times really wanted us to know. The Times had its criticisms of John Paul's papacy ready to go, but apparently went looking for something good to say about the Pope at the last minute:

Notice how Power Line shows they had no quotes from supporters at the ready but only that of critics. They certainly had time to find such information. Just like the news report I criticized in an earlier post had time to find out that Terri Schindler never had an MRI.

Yet look at the Power Line report of their profile of Senator Robert (Sheets) Byrd:

The New York Times features a predictably fawning profile of former Ku Klux Klan Kleagle and current West Virginia Senator Robert Byrd: "A master of Senate's ways is still parrying in his twilight." By contrast with its coverage of the Pope's death, the Times had no problem finding quotes from supporters of Senator Byrd before press time.

With the bias so obvious I have to wonder if the terms "legacy media" or "dead tree media" are really accurate enough. It seems to me that if they continue on this path that they will soon end up only as dead media.

Trackback URI                                                 View blog reactions