Aside: Before beginning I must admit that I, for one, hope the shutdown lasts a while. Then Americans will realize that with the federal government in “neutral” nothing in their life changed. So why then do we need such a massive federal government?
The New York Times (NYT) this week “allowed” pro-Trump letters to the editor to be published. Think about that for just a moment. If they decided to “allow” them to be published, then previously they DID NOT ALLOW them to be published.
[Source: New York Times Stunned To Discover Some People Actually Like Trump, by Jazz Shaw]
To their credit the NYT devoted an entire page in the “letters” section to submissions from people with positive opinions of the Trump administration. However, as Ms. Shaw explains, the Times editorial board needed “to explain to their readers why they felt compelled to take this extraordinary action.” Here is the paragraph explaining their “decision:”
“The Times editorial board has been sharply critical of the Trump presidency, on grounds of policy and personal conduct. Not all readers have been persuaded. In the spirit of open debate, and in hopes of helping readers who agree with us better understand the views of those who don’t, we wanted to let Mr. Trump’s supporters make their best case for him as the first year of his presidency approaches its close. Tomorrow we’ll present some letters from readers who voted for Mr. Trump but are now disillusioned, and from those reacting to today’s letters and our decision to provide Trump voters this platform.”
Ms. Shaw highlighted the several phrases in bold above. As Americans who greatly value a free press we need to examine that paragraph with a jaundiced eye. In my opinion the paragraph speaks volumes about the bias of the left-wing media. Ms. Shaw’s analysis is worth reading and I shall draw extensively from it.
When the NYT states that they have been “sharply critical of the Trump presidency” it is the understatement of the year! Their editorial board “spent more than a year trying to get Hillary Clinton elected and then used the last year attempting to set up a slow motion coup to overturn the results of that election.“
Okay. No news there for conservatives, but the Editorial Board (likely without realizing it) tells us that “Not all readers have been persuaded.” That is a direct admission of THEIR INTENT! In essence they admit that they are not “reporting news.” Rather they have been “attempting to persuade” people to not support the duly elected President of the United States. As Ms. Shaw eloquently states it, “I’m rather gobsmacked to see them flatly admit it in print.”
Of course, they couldn’t possibly simply print these letters. They NEEDED TO APOLOGIZE TO THEIR LEFT WING READERSHIP! As Ms. Shaw points out, “They take the time to explain that they’re printing these awful sentiments which should normally never be acknowledged, ‘in hopes of helping readers who agree with us better understand’ how anyone could possibly support the Trump administration.” This frank admission that it is “us” versus “them” in a supposed NEWSPAPER – by the by, my friends and readers, we are the “them” – is appalling.
The Times essentially closes with an apology. They let their readership know that they will “return to their usual programming” the following day with abundant hate letters from “readers who voted for Mr. Trump but are now disillusioned, and from those reacting to today’s letters!” Otherwise their readers might jump ship because of their completely out-of-character “decision to provide Trump voters this platform.”
God Save the Republic from these “news people!” They are so out of touch that they admit their profound bias without even realizing it.
Roy Filly
The Rugged Individualist 
Baby steps.
Do you think there is any chance they are moving toward being “unbiased?”