Commentary

NY Times Appears To Cave to Liberal Outrage, Changes Headline on Trump Speech Story

It’s not often that a New York Times headline accurately describes a statement by President Donald Trump.

And it’s not often that the nation’s top Democrats openly attack the newspaper that blatantly pushes the liberal line on a daily basis.

But that’s what happened on Monday when The Times published a headline that correctly summed up Trump’s speech in response to mass shootings over the weekend.

LIberals complained — so, naturally, The Times changed the headline.

The headline on the first edition of Tuesday’s Times, above a coverage package, stated “Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism.”

Trending:
Tucker Drops FBI Bombshell: Jan. 6 Organizers 'Were Almost Certainly Working for the FBI'

Since that’s exactly what Trump did in his remarks on Monday at the White House, normal people would have understood that The Times was, for a change, acting like a newspaper instead of a mouthpiece for the Democratic Party.

This is what Trump said:

“The shooter in El Paso posted a manifesto online consumed by racist hate. In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry, and white supremacy. These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hate has no place in America. Hatred warps the mind, ravages the heart, and devours the soul. We have asked the FBI to identify all further resources they need to investigate and disrupt hate crimes and domestic terrorism — whatever they need.”

Since “in one voice … our nation must condemn racism” sounds pretty much like “Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism,” liberals and Democratic presidential contenders went ballistic.

Rep. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, with her usual maturity and judgment, called it an example of “cowardice.”

Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, the New York Democrat with fading presidential hopes, issued a Twitter post attempting to contradict the facts.

Related:
Montana Sheriff Calls Out Dems for Supporting 'Terrorist' Orgs, Leaves Democratic Party

(Actually, that’s exactly what happened. And in a rare nod to the concept of journalism, The Times actually printed it.)

Then there was the comment from New Jersey Sen. Cory Booker – another Democrat trying desperately to keep a presidential bid viable.

What he meant was, “My presidential campaign literally depends on you continuing to skew the truth about Trump to confuse enough American voters that they’ll vote for a Democrat to take his job – particularly me.”

The liberal Times, of course, is proud of its reputation of journalism “without fear or favor.”

It doesn’t hesitate to challenge the Trump administration, every day, on every page. Its columnists range in viewpoints from far left to simply left, with the unbearably boring David Brooks thrown in to pretend to a voice of conservativism. (Conservatism as The New York Times sees it, anyway.)

Do you think The Times felt the liberal pressure?

So what did The Times do? It buckled.

Now, to be fair, there’s no way of knowing if The Times actually caved to pressure from the outside — the liberals who threatened to cancel their subscriptions — or caved to pressure from its own liberal influences on the inside, where the leadership has demonstrated over and over again that it will sacrifice every ideal of journalism if it means it can attack the Trump White House.

Whatever loathsome process was followed, The Times decided the truth wasn’t the news that was fit to print.

Instead, a new headline would focus not on what Trump did, but what he didn’t do.

The new headline in the print version stated: “Assailing Hate But Not Guns,” according to Fox News.

Fox reported that Times spokeswoman Eileen Murphy acknowledged the change in a statement.

“The original headline was flawed and was changed for all editions of the paper following the first edition,” the statement read. “The headline in question never appeared online, only in the first print edition.”

It’s a strange world where, in journalism, what’s “true” is “flawed.”

But it’s the world we live in. No American who knows how to read or can think even a little bit critically can believe that the establishment media is anything but a propaganda machine for liberalism and the Democratic Party.

Decades of history have shown it. The 2016 election put it in sharp, undeniable relief, and the relentlessly negative coverage of the Trump White House has borne it out.

But the Monday headline change at The New York Times might have been the best example yet.

The “newspaper of record” told the truth about Trump for a change, and then took it back.

The Western Journal has reached out to The Times for comment but has not yet received a response. We will update this article if and when we do.

Truth and Accuracy

Submit a Correction →



loading

We are committed to truth and accuracy in all of our journalism. Read our editorial standards.

Tags:
, , , , , , , , ,
Joe has spent more than 30 years as a reporter, copy editor and metro desk editor in newsrooms in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Florida. He's been with Liftable Media since 2015.
Joe has spent more than 30 years as a reporter, copy editor and metro editor in newsrooms in Pennsylvania, West Virginia and Florida. He's been with Liftable Media since 2015. Largely a product of Catholic schools, who discovered Ayn Rand in college, Joe is a lifelong newspaperman who learned enough about the trade to be skeptical of every word ever written. He was also lucky enough to have a job that didn't need a printing press to do it.
Birthplace
Philadelphia
Nationality
American




loading

Conversation