... According to interviews with two dozen people on both sides who were granted anonymity to discuss a sensitive subject, the relationship between the Democratic president and the countrys newspaper of record for years the epitome of a liberal press in the eyes of conservatives remains remarkably tense, beset by misunderstandings, grudges and a general lack of trust. Complaints that were long kept private are even spilling into public view, with campaign aides in Wilmington going further than their colleagues in the White House and routinely blasting the papers coverage in emails, posts on social media and memos.
Although the presidents communications teams bristle at coverage from dozens of outlets, the frustration, and obsession, with the Times is unique, reflecting the resentment of a president with a working-class sense of himself and his team toward a news organization catering to an elite audience and a deep desire for its affirmation of their work. 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.
The presidents press flacks might bemoan what they see as the entitlement of Times staffers, but they themselves put the newspaper on the highest of pedestals given its history, stature and unparalleled reach. And yet, they see the Times falling short in a make-or-break moment for American democracy, stubbornly refusing to adjust its coverage as it strives for the appearance of impartial neutrality, often blurring the asymmetries between former President Donald Trump and Biden when it comes to their perceived flaws and vastly different commitments to democratic principles.
Democrats believe in the importance of a free press in upholding our democracy, and the NYT was for generations an important standard bearer for the fourth estate, said Kate Berner, who worked on Bidens 2020 campaign and then as deputy White House communications director before departing last year. The frustration with the Times is sometimes so intense because the Times is failing at its important responsibility.
Biden aides largely view the election as an existential choice for the country, high stakes that they believe justify tougher tactics toward the Times and the press as a whole. Some Times reporters have found themselves cut off by sources after publishing pieces the Bidens and top aides didnt like. Columnist Maureen Dowd, for example, complained to colleagues that she stopped hearing from White House officials after a column on Hunter Biden. For many Times veterans, such actions suggest that the Trump era has warped many Democrats expectations of journalists. ... Aides in the White House press office and on the presidents campaign pointed to two recent examples of articles by the Times that presented Biden and Trump side by side, emphasizing broad similarities and obscuring the proportional differences. One piece by Michael Shear cast both Biden and Trump as restricting the information the public has about their physical health. 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.
TJ Ducklo, a senior adviser on Bidens campaign, blasted Shears story as part of an ongoing pattern of frustrating coverage by the Times. With limited exceptions, he wrote in a post on X, the Times continues to fail the American people in covering the most important election for democracy in 150+ years. It was not the first time Bidens campaign team publicly went after the Times in a way the White House, for all its irritation, has not. 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.