The End Of The New York Times As We Know It?

Axios: James Bennet resigns as editor of New York Times editorial page

James Bennet has resigned as editor of the New York Times' editorial page, the paper announced Sunday.

Why it matters: Bennet had been under fire for green-lighting an op-ed by Sen. Tom Cotton (R-Ark.) that called on President Trump to "send in the troops" in order to quell violent protests over the death of George Floyd. Times employees organized a protest on social media and claimed that publishing the op-ed put black staff in danger.

• Bennet did not personally read the op-ed before publication, but put out a statement amid employee backlash that outlined his defense for publishing the piece.
• Shortly after, however, a Times spokesperson released a statement saying that Cotton's op-ed failed to meet company standards and that editorial-board processes would be changed as a result.

The big picture: Bennet was seen as a potential successor to current Times executive editor Dean Baquet. Katie Kingsbury has been named as acting editorial page editor through the November election, while Jim Dao, an opinion deputy who oversaw op-eds, is "stepping off the masthead and being reassigned to the newsroom."

Read more ....

Update: NY Times editorial page editor resigns amid staff fury over Tom Cotton op-ed (FOX News)

WNU Editor: It was *news reporters* at the Times who forced management into this position. This means that the wall between news and editorial is now completely gone. And while the New York Times will continue to publish, it is now on a pathway to become significantly less influential.

Update #2: Yup. Another Babylon Bee prophecy fulfilled (see below).

New York Times Accuses The U.S. Military of Celebrating 'White Supremacy'

New York Times editorial: Why Does the U.S. Military Celebrate White Supremacy?

It is time to rename bases for American heroes — not racist traitors.

The white supremacist who murdered nine black churchgoers in Charleston, S.C., five years ago dispensed with the fiction that the Confederate battle flag was an innocuous symbol of “Southern pride.” A murderer’s manifesto describing the killings as the start of a race war — combined with photos of the killer brandishing a pistol and a rebel flag — made it impossible to ignore the connection between Confederate ideology and a blood-drenched tradition of racial terrorism that dates back to the mid-19th century in the American South.

Outrage over the Charleston massacre forced South Carolina to finally remove the Confederate flag from the State House grounds — where it had flown for more than half a century — and led major retailers to drop merchandise bearing Confederate insignia. The National Cathedral in Washington showed how pervasive this iconography had become when it dismantled an elaborate set of stained-glass windows depicting the Confederate generals Robert E. Lee and Stonewall Jackson in saintly poses. As the cathedral dean put it, there was no excuse for the nation’s most visible church to celebrate a cause whose primary reason for being was the preservation and extension of slavery in America.

Institutions that could once have wrapped themselves in Confederacy ideology without consequence were put on notice that public sentiment had shifted. The commandant of the United States Marine Corps tacitly deferred to this new reality last month by banning public display of the Confederate flag at Marine installations. Gen. David H. Berger pointed out in a letter to his fellow Marines that the flag was being pushed out because it had “the power to inflame feelings of division” in a military organization that relies on unity to do its work.

Read more ....

WNU Editor: The New York Times posted this story on the eve of Memorial Day.

Update: Could not have said it any better .... SHAMEFUL: On Eve of Memorial Day, NYT Accuses U.S. Military of Celebrating 'White Supremacy' ( Tyler O'Neil, PJ Media).

New York Times Deletes 9/11 Tweet After Backlash

We've deleted an earlier tweet to this story and have edited for clarity. The story has also been updated.

— The New York Times (@nytimes) September 11, 2019

FOX News: New York Times deletes 9/11 tweet after backlash: 'Airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center'

The New York Times caused an uproar on Wednesday with a now-deleted tweet and now-updated story that originally said “airplanes” were responsible for the tragic events of Sept. 11, 2001.

“18 years have passed since airplanes took aim and brought down the World Trade Center. Today, families will once again gather and grieve at the site where more than 2000 people died,” the Times’ verified Twitter account wrote in a message accompanying a story about 9/11 victims being remembered at Ground Zero.

Read more ....

Update: Here’s The Outrageous 9/11 Tweet The New York Times Quickly Deleted (Daily Caller)

WNU Editor: The New York times just cannot say that radical Islamists were responsible for this horrific attack. And all of this comes on the heel of another eye-opener tweet from the New York Times .... New York Times: Former Chinese Leader Mao Zedong Is 'One Of History’s Great Revolutionary Figures (September 9, 2019).

Why Did The New York Times Outed The CIA’s Top Iran Spy?

Bre Payton, The Federalist: The New York Times Just Outed The CIA’s Top Iran Spy

In an article published Friday, The New York Times outed the Central Intelligence Agency’s (CIA) top spy overseeing the organization’s efforts in Iran. The paper justified its outing of the undercover CIA spy and his role within the agency by saying it was necessary since the agent is “leading an important new administration initiative against Iran.”

Yes. That really happened.

In an article entitled “C.I.A. Names New Iran Chief in a Sign of Trump’s Hard Line,” the newspaper of record revealed that Michael D’Andrea, who previously led the hunt for Osama bin Laden, will now be in charge of the agency’s operations in Iran.

As the Times explained in its report, Iran is “one of the hardest targets” for the CIA to keep tabs on.

Read more ....

Former Post: The CIA's 'Dark Prince' Is Now Responsible For The Iran Desk (June 2, 2017).

WNU Editor: It makes me wonder if the New York Times is so hell bent on protecting President Obama's legacy with Iran .... that they would even out the CIA's top Iran spy. But the best part of this Federalist commentary by Bre Payton is the last ....

.... In 2003, after the name of CIA employee Valerie Plame was revealed in an article by journalist Robert Novak, congressional Democrats demanded criminal investigations and eventual prison time for the individual responsible for leaking Plame’s name. No elected Democrats have yet called for a criminal investigation to determine who illegally leaked the name of the CIA’s top spy overseeing U.S. efforts in Iran.

The New York Times Failed To Mention A Single Word About 9/11 On The 14th Anniversary Of The Attacks

On the 14th anniversary of the attacks, the NYT fails to mention a single word about 9/11 on page 1. #NeverForget pic.twitter.com/fE7y29h7JH

— Jan Crawford (@JanCBS) September 11, 2015

WNU Editor: Every other major newspaper did .... but not The New York Times.

Did The New York Times Editors And Columnists Influence President Obama's Decisions On Syria?

New York Times Editors, Columnists Met With Obama During Syria Push -- Huffington Post

NEW YORK -- In his new book, The Message, MSNBC.com editor Richard Wolffe describes how the Obama White House grew frustrated in 2011 with The New York Times after some negative editorials ran in the paper. President Barack Obama ended up calling Andy Rosenthal, the paper’s editorial page editor, and a couple weeks later Rosenthal and the Times editorial board went to the White House for an off-the-record meeting with the president.

But that wasn’t the last time Obama met with Times editorial board members. On Aug. 29, the president again sat down for an off-the-record discussion with Rosenthal and some members of the editorial board, according to sources familiar with the meeting. Times opinion columnists David Brooks, Gail Collins and Ross Douthat also attended, but editors for the paper's news pages did not.

Read more ....

Update: Report: Obama Consulted NY Times Editors, Columnists on Syria Strategy -- Breitbart

My Comment: I hope that this story is wrong .... but if this is true this is embarrassing on so many levels that I do not even know where to begin. What is the point of having a national security team/State Department/Pentagon/Congress/and foreign allies .... if the final decision is influenced by a newspaper. Not surprising .... the White House and The New York Times are not admitting or denying this story.

Has President Obama Lost The New York Times?

The New York Times building in New York, NY across from the Port Authority. Wikipedia

President Obama’s Dragnet -- New York Times editorial

Within hours of the disclosure that federal authorities routinely collect data on phone calls Americans make, regardless of whether they have any bearing on a counterterrorism investigation, the Obama administration issued the same platitude it has offered every time President Obama has been caught overreaching in the use of his powers: Terrorists are a real menace and you should just trust us to deal with them because we have internal mechanisms (that we are not going to tell you about) to make sure we do not violate your rights.

Those reassurances have never been persuasive — whether on secret warrants to scoop up a news agency’s phone records or secret orders to kill an American suspected of terrorism — especially coming from a president who once promised transparency and accountability.

Read more ....

My Comment: Regular readers of this blog know that I have been critical of the New York Times and it's coverage of President Obama for years. Their unwillingness to do investigative reporting on this White House coupled with their eagerness to bury critical stories on the President when other news agencies reported it made me .... a regular reader of the New York Times since the mid-1980s .... throw my hands up in disappointment and disgust. So it is not surprising that with major scandals now swamping the administration, the New York Times has found itself behind the curve on all of these issues .... so much so that I now find their coverage irrelevant and/or days/weeks behind. To put it bluntly .... the New York Times is no longer the go-to-source for me on breaking news and analysis. They have (unfortunately) put politics before being a good reporter.

But this editorial is a start .... and long overdue. The New York Times is one of America's premier media and news institutions .... now is the time to act like it even if politically .... they support the President's other agendas. Failure to so would only mean that the New York Times .... so eager to say that President Obama is now losing credibility .... be guilty of doing exactly the same thing.

Update: Oooppps .... it looks like I was hoping for too much .... New York Times quietly changes published editorial to make it less damning of Obama.

New York Times Reporter Dies In Syria

Anthony Shadid, center, with residents of Cairo last February. Ed Ou for The New York Times

At Work In Syria, Times Correspondent Dies -- New York Times

Anthony Shadid, a gifted newspaper correspondent whose graceful dispatches for both The New York Times and The Washington Post covered nearly two decades of Middle East conflict and turmoil, died, apparently of an asthma attack, on Thursday while on a reporting assignment in eastern Syria. Tyler Hicks, a Times photographer who was with Mr. Shadid, carried his body across the border to Turkey.

Mr. Shadid, 43, had been reporting inside Syria for a week, gathering information on the Free Syrian Army and other armed elements of the resistance to the government of President Bashar al-Assad, whose military forces have been engaged in a harsh repression of the political opposition in a conflict that is now nearly a year old.

Read more ....

Update: A collection of Anthony Shadid's work and videos can be read and viewed here.

My Comment: Way to young to pass away. I have always respected his work and opinions, and was one journalist whose articles were on my "to read list". Our prayers and condolences go to his family and loved ones.

A Response To The New York Times Coverage Of President Bush's Surveillance Program -- A Commentary

How Much Damage Did The New York Times Do? -- Powerline Blog

James Risen and Eric Lichtblau are the New York Times reporters who disclosed the highly classified NSA eavesdropping program in December 2005. In my view their behavior was blatantly illegal. In all likelikhood it did great damage to the national security of the United States. I wrote about their story and provided relevant links in the Weekly Standard column "Exposure."

In any event, Risen and Lichtblau are principals in the story. In today's New York Times, Risen and Lichtblau nevertheless cover the release of the unclassified version of the report of five Inspectors General on the NSA program (referred to in the report as the President's surveillance program or PSP). The five IGs signing on to the report are attached to the Department of Defense, the Department of Justice, the CIA, the NSA and the Office of the Director of National Intelligence.

Here are the first four paragraphs of Risen and Lichtblau's story today:

Read more ....

My Comment: As editor of this blog, I am sometimes given information and/or news that I know would perk the interest of the media and my readership .... but I will confess that if this information has even the remotest possibility of harming our soldiers and/or allies .... I will not publish it.

For example .... last year I was emailed information that detailed U.S. counter measures against IEDs in Iraq .... I refused to publish it .... but others did. My reasons are simple .... I may lose the scoop but I go to bed every night and I sleep well.

The reporters for the New York Times .... in their zeal to get the scoop and to publish it .... have caused terrible harm to U.S. National Security. I do not have any hard evidence on what is the body count from this loss of information .... but I know, and they know, and now you know .... that what they did will have consequences that will have severe repercussions in the short to long term.

I am one who firmly believes in the freedom of the press. But I am also one who firmly believes that one should always be responsible for one's actions. My only hope is that one day the reporters and editors for the New York Times who were responsible for publishing this story will be confronted personally with the consequences of their actions. Knowing how karma works .... we should not be surprise that we may one day see it.

The Powerline Blog has a good retort to the New York Times coverage on this issue. Read and ponder.