home > archive > 2003 > this article

The New York Times v. truth

By Bruce Walker
web posted June 23, 2003

The recent spectacle of Jason Blair and his oily ex-bosses straining to finesse indefensible behavior into something else reveals only a small sliver of New York Times' long campaign against truth. The consequences of this war on truth have been enormous.

New York Times reporter Walter Duranty
Duranty

New York Times reporter Walter Duranty committed crimes against truth no different from than the Big Lie of Nazi propagandists, which earned these monsters well-earned appointments with the gallows at Nuremberg. Duranty, instead, won a Pulitzer Prize in 1932 for his Soviet holocaust denial.

In the late 1950s, the New York Times backed Castro against a run of the mill Latin American boss, Batista. Castro, like Duranty, admired Stalin, but Castro also idolized Hitler and Mussolini. Cuba under Castro has descended from having the highest overall standard of living and quality of live of any Spanish speaking nation in the world to a ghoulish and desperately poor prison island.

How could the New York Times believe that Castro would be better than Batista, who had won sixty percent of the popular vote when he ran for President of Cuba in 1940, who later left office after losing the next election, and who had repeatedly sided with the workers of Cuba against businesses? By 1959, what more evidence of the fathomless failure of Marxist thuggery was needed?

A few years later, the New York Times proclaimed "God is Dead." The newspaper neglected to mention, however, that new gods were moving into town. These savage deities would clap when Saigon became Ho Chi Minh City and laugh when the nation of Cambodia became one vast Auschwitz. The most sacred temple of these new gods were the offices of the New York Times.

Truth - a value increasingly absent in public policy debates - was another victim of this dreadful publication. In the New York Times v. Sullivan, the absurd requirement of "actual malice" was created to protect the periodical against the legal consequences of invented "facts" about the conduct of Alabama state officials during the desegregation of Alabama colleges.

Routine defamation hiding behind the skirts of social justice led to a series of blatant lying about conservative figures and conservative policies which has so diminished the value of truth that America has almost become a Tower of Babel, with Leftists confident that constantly repeated lies are actually facts.

How ironic that the Jason Blair Affair, which is almost comically innocent compared with the horrors which the arrogance of the New York Times has inflicted upon mankind, is just another casual example of boorish overreaching in some collective and immutable notion of racial justice! Now, however, the New York Times is not judge, jury and executioner. It is, rather, the accused.

What would be justice for the New York Times' this war on truth? What standard of justice has this remote and powerful corporation set for other corporations? When corporations tell the truth, but not every single fact, the New York Times, busily knitting as the carted victims of the guillotine approach, has demanded - on our behalf! - brutal standards of rough justice.
The New York Times is simply another big corporation with immense wealth and power. Why should this newspaper be treated differently? Is its communication with the public different than, say, the advertising of Phillip Morris? Is this the loophole which allows the New York Times to slither free from the verdict of a betrayed humanity?

The New York Times, indeed, is different from Phillip Morris or General Motors or Exxon. Those corporations sell products, and people expect salesmanship. The New York Times is in the business of selling information. It does not have a lower duty to us than a used car salesman; it has a higher duty to us.

The closest analogy to what the New York Times has done with truth is the current ghastly mess of stockbrokers and related firms, who had kept critical facts from us so that we would intentionally make misguided decisions about important issues.

The New York Times has collaborated as cynically in the savage extermination of 100 million victims of Communism as any Swiss banking firm collaborated in the 6 million Jewish victims of the Holocaust. Let the great-grandchild of a dead Kulak step forward or perhaps the last member of a slaughtered Cambodian family or a refugee from Castro's nightmarish realm.

Let the newspaper which prides itself on influencing the thinking of America now account for its long, venal and destructive record of unrepentant violence against truth, and let it face the horrific consequences of this crime.

Bruce Walker is a senior writer with Enter Stage Right. He is also a frequent contributor to The Pragmatist and The Common Conservative.

Other related stories: (open in a new window)

  • The anti-male New York Times by Wendy McElroy (June 16, 2003)
    Not only has it had some problems with the truth, which is bad enough, but Wendy McElroy believes the New York Times has an anti-male agenda as well
  • The meaning of Jayson Blair by Kimberley Jane Wilson (May 19, 2003)
    Kimberley Jane Wilson reflects on the scandal over at the New York Times and what it means to us all

Visit the Campaign to Revoke Walter Duranty's Pulitzer Prize here or fill out an online form here.

Printer friendly version
Printer friendly version
Send a link to this page!
Send a link to this story




Printer friendly version Send a link to this page!


Get weekly updates about new issues of ESR!
e-mail:
Subscribe
Unsubscribe

 


Home

1996-2013, Enter Stage Right and/or its creators. All rights reserved.