Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
Related: Editorials & Other Articles, Issue Forums, Alliance Forums, Region ForumsPromoting Hillary, The New York Times Once Again Marginalizes the Left
via truthdig:
Harpers Magazine Publisher Rick MacArthur bewailed the failure of The New York Times to run anything but the most establishment liberal view in its pages when the paper interpreted the Republican victory in the November midterm elections as an open opportunity for Hillary Clinton to resurrect the Democratic Party.
MacArthur wrote in his column in the Providence Journal on Nov. 20:
A typical media analysis was provided by The New York Times, which almost immediately started promoting the inevitability of Hillary Clintons nomination as the next Democratic candidate for president. Midterms, for Clinton Team, Arent All Gloom declared its front-page headline on Nov. 7. According to the papers reporter, Amy Chozick, the misfortune of President Obama and Senate Majority (soon-to-be-Minority) Leader Harry Reid (D., Nev.) equaled good news for Mrs. Clinton and her advisers, among whom a consensus formed that it is time to accelerate her schedule. This move toward a more rapid coronation was due to pressure on the former First Lady to resurrect the Democratic Party, since Mrs. Clinton is already being scrutinized as the partys presumptive nominee.
With a Democrat in the White House and Republicans holding only a slight majority in the Senate, MacArthur suggests that the word resurrect seems hyperbolic. And couldnt low voter turnout in the midterms indicate dissatisfaction with Democrats as well as Republicans?
Two paragraphs after the excerpts quoted above, the Times dropped any pretense of fair and balanced reporting by presenting the institutional voice of people who have very little interest in journalism, or, for that matter, democracy, MacArthur wrote. According to Chozick and her editors, In many ways, Tuesdays election results clear a path for Mrs. Clinton. The lopsided outcome and conservative tilt makes it less likely she would face an insurgent challenger from the left.
That opinion, says MacArthur, is based either on Chozicks laziness or her editors preference for a Clinton candidacy. But whatever the motivation, the assertion that Hillarys path is clear was pulled out of the air. ......................(more)
The complete piece is at: http://www.truthdig.com/eartotheground/item/the_new_york_times_marginalizes_the_left_once_again_20141130
InfoView thread info, including edit history
TrashPut this thread in your Trash Can (My DU » Trash Can)
BookmarkAdd this thread to your Bookmarks (My DU » Bookmarks)
3 replies, 644 views
ShareGet links to this post and/or share on social media
AlertAlert this post for a rule violation
PowersThere are no powers you can use on this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
ReplyReply to this post
EditCannot edit other people's posts
Rec (5)
ReplyReply to this post
3 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
Promoting Hillary, The New York Times Once Again Marginalizes the Left (Original Post)
marmar
Nov 2014
OP
NYC_SKP
(68,644 posts)1. NYTimes "Media Darling""?
Yeah, sounds about right.
Wellstone ruled
(34,661 posts)2. And you thought different.
Get real,the left wing bash started the day after the mid terms. Clinton's are the darlings of Wall Street and the 1 % ers. If for one minute you think other,got some beach front here in the Mohave Desert,and so it goes.
Simeon Salus
(1,142 posts)3. Since MacArthur is fond of quotating just about everything for emphasis,
I'm surprised there are no quotation marks around "coronation." I've got news. There WILL be a primary, and Hillary didn't do so well last time, even though she was the presumptive nominee well before the primaries began.