Antifar posted...
Columnist Maureen Dowd, for example, complained to colleagues that she stopped hearing from White House officials after a column on Hunter Biden.
"How dare Joe Biden be mad that the NYT went after his son, who isn't in politics!"
Another in the papers On Politics newsletter by the newly hired Jess Bidgood reacted to Arizonas reinstatement of a Civil War era law outlawing
abortion
by
framing Biden and Trump as two imperfect messengers on the issue
, a gross journalistic injustice, campaign officials said, given Trumps outsized role in appointing the Supreme Court justices who overturned Roe v. Wade.
In February, the campaign blasted the Times and other news organizations for
focusing more on the presidents age than Trumps comment encouraging Russia to do whatever the hell they want to any NATO country
not meeting defense spending benchmarks. If you read the New York Times this weekend, you might have missed it buried behind five separate opinion pieces about how the president is 81 year old something that has been true since his birthday in November and *zero* on this topic, Ducklo wrote.
Sounds like the Biden admin is 100% in the right on this, and screw the NYT
For many Times veterans, such actions suggest that the Trump era has warped many Democrats expectations of journalists.
"You're supposed to quietly take our blatantly unbalanced and biased reporting like spineless worms" being the expectations that Dems are supposed to have?
On the other side, the newspaper carries its own singular obsession with the president, aggrieved over his refusal to give the paper a sit-down interview that Publisher AG Sulzberger and other top editors believe to be its birthright.
Well, try having journalistic integrity?