MEDIA AND CULTURE  
comments_imageCOMMENTS: 12

NY Times Holds Stories Because They're Afraid of Conservatives

The John McCain-Vicki Iseman story is not the first article the NYT has held back for fear of Republican attacks on the paper.
February 21, 2008  |  
 
 
LIKE THIS ARTICLE ?
Join our mailing list:

Sign up to stay up to date on the latest Media and Culture headlines via email.

 
 
Advertisement
 

The John McCain-Vicki Iseman story is not the first article the New York Times has held back for political reasons. They have now done this on at least three occasions:


1. The original FISA story on how the Bush administration was not getting warrants for wiretaps inside the United States.

2. The original story in 2004 that showed Osama bin Laden was hiding in Pakistan, not Afghanistan.

3. The McCain-Iseman story.


We had James Risen, the writer of the first two stories on our show back in 2005 and he admitted that they held the Bin Laden story until after the 2004 election because the New York Times didn't want to "get caught up in the politics of it."


Another way of stating that is that they were afraid of being called the liberal media by Republicans. After decades of being chastised for being liberal, they have become gun-shy. In this McCain story, they also held off until they were about to outed by other news agencies as sitting on the story.


Conservatives are now charging that the New York Times held off on the story until after McCain had wrapped up the nomination, so they could ruin his chances in the general election. First, this is wrong because if they wanted to hurt his chances of getting elected, they would have revealed this fact much closer to the general election. They couldn't have done McCain a bigger favor than by waiting to release the piece until after the primaries and way, way before the general.


Since they endorsed McCain in January despite knowing this story -- and the clear implications of hypocrisy on campaign finance reform, let alone the other implications -- the most likely conspiracy would be that they favor McCain in the election. But I don't think there is a conspiracy.


I think the far simpler answer is the correct one. The McCain campaign threatened and intimidated them as the Bush team has done on countless occasions and they gave in until someone else was about to release the story. The only thing worse than being bullied by Republicans is getting scooped by your competitors.


The story here isn't that the NYT is trying to hurt conservatives, it's the exact opposite -- they're afraid of them. On every occasion that they have had a major story like this, they have held it after being badgered by Republicans. They only print the stories when there are no other options left and the story is about to get printed elsewhere anyway.


In the end, the concerns Jim Risen expressed to us about politicizing these stories are ironically counterproductive. When any paper holds a story because of political pressure, they are politicizing the story. The only way to avoid making this type of political decision, by commission or omission, is to print the story when you have it.


Now the New York Times has gotten itself in the same old pickle they always do -- they are going to be criticized by Republicans when in fact they were trying to be extra fair to Republicans. What they don't get is that the conservatives view them as the enemy; they are never going to be appeased. So, do us all a favor and just print the damn story when you have it.

Cenk Uygur is co-host of The Young Turks, the first liberal radio show to air nationwide.
Email
Print
Share
Post on reddit
Post on stumbleupon
Post on facebook
Post on digg
Post on twitter
Post on delicious
LIKED THIS ARTICLE? JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST
Stay up to date with the latest Media and Culture headlines via email
See more stories tagged with: republicans, new york times, john mccain, vicki iseman


Comments are closed-

NYT - on the ropes
Posted by: carbon-based on Feb 21, 2008 12:39 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not so sure that the NYT is afraid of anything conservative. The fact that they would even divulge where Bin Laden was hiding, and US efforts to track him just point to how irresponsible they have been over the last 5 years.

Now, the fact that their circulation is down 20% over the past few years may have a bearing on what and when they run something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» US efforts to track Bin Laden Posted by: TruthBeTold

Comments are closed-

You forgot one!
Posted by: Rainy24 on Feb 22, 2008 5:46 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Didn't the NY Times sit on the story about Bush being wired during a debate. Remember when he stood there and said "let me finish" when no one was talking to him and his light was still green? Remember the pictures of his suit with the bulge? I sure wish they would report the truth about that story. How about the story that $1,000,000 was offered to anyone who could prove they served in Alabama with GW? No one ever came forward to collect.

They miss more stories than they report out of fear of their investors and clients.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

NY Times still won't report the real news
Posted by: Pop on Feb 22, 2008 6:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NY Times is little different than all other mainstream media. Their mission is not to keep the herd of sheep informed, but to report as much as possible that will help keep us sheep away from official secracy that is very much our right and our need to know. The press here is comparable with that of the old Soviet Union. They would keep us satisfied with a domestically attractive smaller issues while our government guts our constitution and murders innocent people in the Middle East so they can have their oil. Other very real issues such as what really happened on September 11, 2001 with evidence begging for the true story are simply ignored.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The MSM is Owned and Controlled
Posted by: ronheri on Feb 22, 2008 7:47 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All of the major newsoutlets are owned and controlled by the transworld-cororations...period. All of them. They don't reort the truth, unless it serves the purpse of the power-elite. These are propaganda machines serving their masters. There are so few independent investigative reporters left anymore. Just like the controlled media in China and Russia, we are given just what they want us to know. Turn off the tv, no major newspapers or magazines. Go to the internet, or talk radio; make your own conclusions; doubt and question everything. Especially every word originating from our "leaders in Washington. This is just one more nail they have put in the coffin of our Constitution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

author is correct,nyt cowed by Bush regime
Posted by: whealeydj on Feb 23, 2008 2:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NYT held the story on FISA for three years. If they were the liberals the right wing wackos portray, they would have released during 2004 elections perhaps in response the Swift Boats attacks. Who broke the story about Bush drunk driving the week before the election in 2000? that seemed to be timed for most effect. what I would like to see is publicizing of any other lobbyists McCain that is close to; Obama and Clinton too. Is Iseman the only one? Or as a long term chair of Senate Commerce Committee who else did McCain have a warm relationship? I would like to see a revival of how being one of Keating five affected his career and is he as clean money as he claims to be. It would be good if the NYT would just regularly publish details from opensecrets.org on the candidates; who contributes to candidates and records of quid pro quo is certainly news fit to print.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

WE are the media
Posted by: metamind on Feb 23, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who has access to the Internet is part of the media. How many emails can you send in a day? 1,000? 10,000? Well, if you join mailing lists at Yahoo Groups or Google Groups or any number of other places you can reach thousands of people easily. You can reach thousands more by posting messages to popular blogs or sites like Alternet.

The media often fail to report ... or report poorly ... bad things about powerful people.

For example, did you know that 40 percent of the wealth of America is owned by one percent of the people? WHO are these people? WHAT are they doing with their wealth?
Have you seen those stories?

Who profitted from 9-11 by placing "put options" on American and United airlines? Have you seen that story?

Did you know that Hillary voted for the bankrupcy bill? Did you know that the Savings and Loan scandal involved Neil Bush and John McCain and cost the taxpayers $150 billion? The Republicans have been fleecing Americans with their scams for decades. NEVER vote Republican.

You have the power. You are the media if you want to be. Spread the truth. Post to the news groups and to Yahoo Groups and Google Groups and send lots and lots of email. Get a free account at gmail.com ... it's the best email I've found.

When you find a good message ... pass it on to many others.

Stop whining about how bad the media is and take responsibility for disseminating the truth as you understand it. The Internet is the most powerful communication medium every invented. Take advantage of it!

It's all US. WE are the problem. WE are the solution.

Steve Moyer
Reasons to Reject Republicans
MetaSearch

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

New logo
Posted by: luckypuck on Feb 23, 2008 10:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"All the gutless news that's fit to print."

"All the news the nation needs we'll print unless we'll get criticized."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

'Nother logo
Posted by: luckypuck on Feb 23, 2008 10:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Only the news our corporate investors think is fit to print."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Very soon now...
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Feb 24, 2008 6:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...the term "Conservative" is going to carry the same connotation throughout America, as does the term "Liberal", now. That is, as a description of weak and cowardly people who never hit a lick in any kind of war.

The only difference being, of course, that in the case of Liberals that was always a lie: in the case of Conservatives, that has always been the truth. From Bush/Cheney on down, a grosser collection of cowards, born and bred, never existed in any one place before.

Their single "exception that proves the rule"--McCain, with his POW experience in Vietnam--is reviled by most NeoCONS as a 'traitor to the party'...this is one of the many reasons that I am now and always have been a proud Liberal.

For other reasons to be proud of America's basic Liberalism, (which persists through the last eight years of relentless NeoCON assaults) see the writings of our Founding Fathers, including the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States of America.

Both, documents which could only have been written by deeply committed lovers of Freedom, such as--in naming themselves Liberals--the Founding Fathers, certainly were.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

How much are we really shocked?
Posted by: GarrisonPayneLeonard38H on Feb 25, 2008 9:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did anyone expect a different result from The Royal Corps of Stenographers?

Consider the history:

A century ago, American industry began a retrenchment that we did not really see until the 1980s: Gradually it shifted from making to taking.

The Second World War flattened that curve for a couple of decades, but the shift continued: Pure research (genuine new discovery) lost out to applied research (mining pure discoveries for profit-makers), and increased protection of "intellectual property" put more limits on both tracks.

Our Big Three Automakers became increasingly tentative as designers, and more aggressive as whiners, scapegoating unions for Management's spineless turn toward profit-taking instead of car-making.

Wall Street began de facto to control industry, with the disastrous results that at least some of us can admit.

About twenty years ago, when I worked for the NY Times (it was not for long, and I have repented), I heard frequent references to The Suits, a faction that had risen to control the admin side of the paper. After the movie "Wall Street" premiered, they were also called The Gekkos or The Gekko Gang. This faction was a hard-eyed bunch of soulless Reaganite corporate cogs: Their rise first sapped the paper's vitality, then crushed its independence. A few voices of reason persist, but they are lost in the great gray wash of the daily news-lump.

The Gray Lady is doing nothing more than following the trend to risk-shifting management practices pioneered in the rest of the Greed Culture. Feasting on its own successes, it sold its soul to in-house Reaganites.

Fix the basic cultural problem -- glorification of childish selfishness as "success" -- and the Times must eventually choose to follow or wither.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

NYT Subscribers Do Us ALL a Big Favor, Please!
Posted by: davidt on Mar 10, 2008 5:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To all you NYT subscribers. Just cancel your subscriptions.

Aren't you tired of them getting down on their knees in front of the GOP Noise Machine yet to do God knows what?

They are ascaid of Duh & his gang cutthroats who, as the Cenk says will NEVER be happy with them.

Bill O'Rascist calls them "liberal" as does the rest of the RNM. Even though:

1. They supported the war in Iwreck.

2. They echoed perfectly the GOP talking points re WMD, Osama-Hussein connection, aluminum tubes.

3. Ignored to the point of justification the TREASON committed in outing Valerie Plame.

4. Hired a criminal Karl Rove, who personally saw to it that non-White votes were ILLEGALLY disenfranchised in the 2000 & 2004 elections by using caging lists. Some of these voters were in uniform in Iraq--something Rove NEVER came close to doing.

5. Hired, the absolutely WORST primogenitor for the NEO-CON agenda named William Kristol. Son of Irving, the ORIGINAL neo-con. He has been wrong right down the line, literally every time he opens his fucking mouth. Why does he warrant a position on the NYT? "Oh, I like Bill's comments, I think he is getting an unfair wrap about his efforts for the war in Iraq" This was a statement by an editor despite the fact that he RAN a now DEFUNCT PNAC (out of the AEI building in DC) that envisioned the New American Strategy that would enable the USA to control the OIL of the world and thus control the WORLD. I recall a Sean Connery line in Dr. No upon hearing HIS master plans: "World domination, same old dream."

The NYT no longer should be considered a newspaper. But if you want to line your birdcage with it that's your choice.

Regards

David T. Gray
Claremont, NH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Alternet Comments:

Comments are closed-

NYT - on the ropes
Posted by: carbon-based on Feb 21, 2008 12:39 PM   
Current rating: 3    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
I'm not so sure that the NYT is afraid of anything conservative. The fact that they would even divulge where Bin Laden was hiding, and US efforts to track him just point to how irresponsible they have been over the last 5 years.

Now, the fact that their circulation is down 20% over the past few years may have a bearing on what and when they run something.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

» US efforts to track Bin Laden Posted by: TruthBeTold

Comments are closed-

You forgot one!
Posted by: Rainy24 on Feb 22, 2008 5:46 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Didn't the NY Times sit on the story about Bush being wired during a debate. Remember when he stood there and said "let me finish" when no one was talking to him and his light was still green? Remember the pictures of his suit with the bulge? I sure wish they would report the truth about that story. How about the story that $1,000,000 was offered to anyone who could prove they served in Alabama with GW? No one ever came forward to collect.

They miss more stories than they report out of fear of their investors and clients.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

NY Times still won't report the real news
Posted by: Pop on Feb 22, 2008 6:06 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NY Times is little different than all other mainstream media. Their mission is not to keep the herd of sheep informed, but to report as much as possible that will help keep us sheep away from official secracy that is very much our right and our need to know. The press here is comparable with that of the old Soviet Union. They would keep us satisfied with a domestically attractive smaller issues while our government guts our constitution and murders innocent people in the Middle East so they can have their oil. Other very real issues such as what really happened on September 11, 2001 with evidence begging for the true story are simply ignored.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

The MSM is Owned and Controlled
Posted by: ronheri on Feb 22, 2008 7:47 PM   
Current rating: 4    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
All of the major newsoutlets are owned and controlled by the transworld-cororations...period. All of them. They don't reort the truth, unless it serves the purpse of the power-elite. These are propaganda machines serving their masters. There are so few independent investigative reporters left anymore. Just like the controlled media in China and Russia, we are given just what they want us to know. Turn off the tv, no major newspapers or magazines. Go to the internet, or talk radio; make your own conclusions; doubt and question everything. Especially every word originating from our "leaders in Washington. This is just one more nail they have put in the coffin of our Constitution.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

author is correct,nyt cowed by Bush regime
Posted by: whealeydj on Feb 23, 2008 2:07 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
NYT held the story on FISA for three years. If they were the liberals the right wing wackos portray, they would have released during 2004 elections perhaps in response the Swift Boats attacks. Who broke the story about Bush drunk driving the week before the election in 2000? that seemed to be timed for most effect. what I would like to see is publicizing of any other lobbyists McCain that is close to; Obama and Clinton too. Is Iseman the only one? Or as a long term chair of Senate Commerce Committee who else did McCain have a warm relationship? I would like to see a revival of how being one of Keating five affected his career and is he as clean money as he claims to be. It would be good if the NYT would just regularly publish details from opensecrets.org on the candidates; who contributes to candidates and records of quid pro quo is certainly news fit to print.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

WE are the media
Posted by: metamind on Feb 23, 2008 8:24 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Anyone who has access to the Internet is part of the media. How many emails can you send in a day? 1,000? 10,000? Well, if you join mailing lists at Yahoo Groups or Google Groups or any number of other places you can reach thousands of people easily. You can reach thousands more by posting messages to popular blogs or sites like Alternet.

The media often fail to report ... or report poorly ... bad things about powerful people.

For example, did you know that 40 percent of the wealth of America is owned by one percent of the people? WHO are these people? WHAT are they doing with their wealth?
Have you seen those stories?

Who profitted from 9-11 by placing "put options" on American and United airlines? Have you seen that story?

Did you know that Hillary voted for the bankrupcy bill? Did you know that the Savings and Loan scandal involved Neil Bush and John McCain and cost the taxpayers $150 billion? The Republicans have been fleecing Americans with their scams for decades. NEVER vote Republican.

You have the power. You are the media if you want to be. Spread the truth. Post to the news groups and to Yahoo Groups and Google Groups and send lots and lots of email. Get a free account at gmail.com ... it's the best email I've found.

When you find a good message ... pass it on to many others.

Stop whining about how bad the media is and take responsibility for disseminating the truth as you understand it. The Internet is the most powerful communication medium every invented. Take advantage of it!

It's all US. WE are the problem. WE are the solution.

Steve Moyer
Reasons to Reject Republicans
MetaSearch

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

New logo
Posted by: luckypuck on Feb 23, 2008 10:23 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"All the gutless news that's fit to print."

"All the news the nation needs we'll print unless we'll get criticized."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

'Nother logo
Posted by: luckypuck on Feb 23, 2008 10:30 AM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
"Only the news our corporate investors think is fit to print."

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

Very soon now...
Posted by: jvaljon1 on Feb 24, 2008 6:31 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
...the term "Conservative" is going to carry the same connotation throughout America, as does the term "Liberal", now. That is, as a description of weak and cowardly people who never hit a lick in any kind of war.

The only difference being, of course, that in the case of Liberals that was always a lie: in the case of Conservatives, that has always been the truth. From Bush/Cheney on down, a grosser collection of cowards, born and bred, never existed in any one place before.

Their single "exception that proves the rule"--McCain, with his POW experience in Vietnam--is reviled by most NeoCONS as a 'traitor to the party'...this is one of the many reasons that I am now and always have been a proud Liberal.

For other reasons to be proud of America's basic Liberalism, (which persists through the last eight years of relentless NeoCON assaults) see the writings of our Founding Fathers, including the Bill of Rights and the Constitution of the United States of America.

Both, documents which could only have been written by deeply committed lovers of Freedom, such as--in naming themselves Liberals--the Founding Fathers, certainly were.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

How much are we really shocked?
Posted by: GarrisonPayneLeonard38H on Feb 25, 2008 9:24 AM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
Did anyone expect a different result from The Royal Corps of Stenographers?

Consider the history:

A century ago, American industry began a retrenchment that we did not really see until the 1980s: Gradually it shifted from making to taking.

The Second World War flattened that curve for a couple of decades, but the shift continued: Pure research (genuine new discovery) lost out to applied research (mining pure discoveries for profit-makers), and increased protection of "intellectual property" put more limits on both tracks.

Our Big Three Automakers became increasingly tentative as designers, and more aggressive as whiners, scapegoating unions for Management's spineless turn toward profit-taking instead of car-making.

Wall Street began de facto to control industry, with the disastrous results that at least some of us can admit.

About twenty years ago, when I worked for the NY Times (it was not for long, and I have repented), I heard frequent references to The Suits, a faction that had risen to control the admin side of the paper. After the movie "Wall Street" premiered, they were also called The Gekkos or The Gekko Gang. This faction was a hard-eyed bunch of soulless Reaganite corporate cogs: Their rise first sapped the paper's vitality, then crushed its independence. A few voices of reason persist, but they are lost in the great gray wash of the daily news-lump.

The Gray Lady is doing nothing more than following the trend to risk-shifting management practices pioneered in the rest of the Greed Culture. Feasting on its own successes, it sold its soul to in-house Reaganites.

Fix the basic cultural problem -- glorification of childish selfishness as "success" -- and the Times must eventually choose to follow or wither.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]


Comments are closed-

NYT Subscribers Do Us ALL a Big Favor, Please!
Posted by: davidt on Mar 10, 2008 5:33 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To all you NYT subscribers. Just cancel your subscriptions.

Aren't you tired of them getting down on their knees in front of the GOP Noise Machine yet to do God knows what?

They are ascaid of Duh & his gang cutthroats who, as the Cenk says will NEVER be happy with them.

Bill O'Rascist calls them "liberal" as does the rest of the RNM. Even though:

1. They supported the war in Iwreck.

2. They echoed perfectly the GOP talking points re WMD, Osama-Hussein connection, aluminum tubes.

3. Ignored to the point of justification the TREASON committed in outing Valerie Plame.

4. Hired a criminal Karl Rove, who personally saw to it that non-White votes were ILLEGALLY disenfranchised in the 2000 & 2004 elections by using caging lists. Some of these voters were in uniform in Iraq--something Rove NEVER came close to doing.

5. Hired, the absolutely WORST primogenitor for the NEO-CON agenda named William Kristol. Son of Irving, the ORIGINAL neo-con. He has been wrong right down the line, literally every time he opens his fucking mouth. Why does he warrant a position on the NYT? "Oh, I like Bill's comments, I think he is getting an unfair wrap about his efforts for the war in Iraq" This was a statement by an editor despite the fact that he RAN a now DEFUNCT PNAC (out of the AEI building in DC) that envisioned the New American Strategy that would enable the USA to control the OIL of the world and thus control the WORLD. I recall a Sean Connery line in Dr. No upon hearing HIS master plans: "World domination, same old dream."

The NYT no longer should be considered a newspaper. But if you want to line your birdcage with it that's your choice.

Regards

David T. Gray
Claremont, NH

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

 
Advertisement
From The Blog
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
Most Read
Most Emailed
Most Discussed
On REDDIT
On DIGG
 
loading ...
POWERED BY DIGG'S USERS