Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

New York Times Editor Notes Paper's Bias on Gay Marriage
National Organization for Marriage (NOM) Blog ^ | Aug 28 2012 | Brian Brown

Posted on 08/29/2012 6:23:03 AM PDT by scottjewell

Not surprised but happy to see it admitted! This from Arthur Brisbane, public editor of the New York Times:

"...I also noted two years ago that I had taken up the public editor duties believing “there is no conspiracy” and that The Times’s output was too vast and complex to be dictated by any Wizard of Oz-like individual or cabal. I still believe that, but also see that the hive on Eighth Avenue is powerfully shaped by a culture of like minds — a phenomenon, I believe, that is more easily recognized from without than from within.

When The Times covers a national presidential campaign, I have found that the lead editors and reporters are disciplined about enforcing fairness and balance, and usually succeed in doing so.

Across the paper’s many departments, though, so many share a kind of political and cultural progressivism — for lack of a better term — that this worldview virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times.

As a result, developments like the Occupy movement and gay marriage seem almost to erupt in The Times, overloved and undermanaged, more like causes than news subjects."

[from a posted comment on NOM:

"The first Public Editor the times had also recognized this bias specifically regarding the issue of same-sex "marriage"

He said when it comes to issues like same-sex "marriage" the Times amounted to "something approaching naked cheerleading"

He was the 1st or 2nd public editor at the time of the Goodridge ..Mass..decision." ]

TOPICS: Society
KEYWORDS: homosexualagenda; liberalmedia; nom; nyt

1 posted on 08/29/2012 6:23:05 AM PDT by scottjewell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | View Replies]

To: scottjewell

Here is what the first public editor, Daniel Okrent, of New York Times said with regard to same sex marriage coverage:

“THE PUBLIC EDITOR; Is The New York Times a Liberal Newspaper?”

“The gay marriage issue provides a perfect example. Set aside the editorial page, the columnists or the lengthy article in the magazine (’’Toward a More Perfect Union,’’ by David J. Garrow, May 9) that compared the lawyers who won the Massachusetts same-sex marriage lawsuit to Thurgood Marshall and Martin Luther King. That’s all fine, especially for those of us who believe that homosexual couples should have precisely the same civil rights as heterosexuals.

But for those who also believe the news pages cannot retain their credibility unless all aspects of an issue are subject to robust examination, it’s disappointing to see The Times present the social and cultural aspects of same-sex marriage in a tone that approaches cheerleading.

So far this year, front-page headlines have told me that ‘’For Children of Gays, Marriage Brings Joy’’ (March 19); that the family of ‘’Two Fathers, With One Happy to Stay at Home’’ (Jan. 12) is a new archetype; and that ‘’Gay Couples Seek Unions in God’s Eyes’’ (Jan. 30). I’ve learned where gay couples go to celebrate their marriages; I’ve met gay couples picking out bridal dresses; I’ve been introduced to couples who have been together for decades and have now sanctified their vows in Canada, couples who have successfully integrated the world of competitive ballroom dancing, couples whose lives are the platonic model of suburban stability.

Every one of these articles was perfectly legitimate. Cumulatively, though, they would make a very effective ad campaign for the gay marriage cause.

You wouldn’t even need the articles: run the headlines over the invariably sunny pictures of invariably happy people that ran with most of these pieces, and you’d have the makings of a life insurance commercial.

This implicit advocacy is underscored by what hasn’t appeared. Apart from one excursion into the legal ramifications of custody battles (’’Split Gay Couples Face Custody Hurdles,’’ by Adam Liptak and Pam Belluck, March 24), potentially nettlesome effects of gay marriage have been virtually absent from The Times since the issue exploded last winter.

The San Francisco Chronicle runs an uninflected article about Congressional testimony from a Stanford scholar making the case that gay marriage in the Netherlands has had a deleterious effect on heterosexual marriage.

The Boston Globe explores the potential impact of same-sex marriage on tax revenues, and the paucity of reliable research on child-rearing in gay families. But in The Times, I have learned next to nothing about these issues, nor about partner abuse in the gay community, about any social difficulties that might be encountered by children of gay couples or about divorce rates (or causes, or consequences) among the 7,000 couples legally joined in Vermont since civil union was established there four years ago.”

2 posted on 08/29/2012 6:30:08 AM PDT by scottjewell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: scottjewell

The first step is admitting you have a BIAS.

3 posted on 08/29/2012 7:29:29 AM PDT by kevinm13 (Tim Geithner is a tax cheat. Manmade "Global Warming" is a HOAX!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: scottjewell
especially for those of us who believe that homosexual couples should have precisely the same civil rights as heterosexuals.

Well I'm not sure about the concept of a collective right as applied to a "couple", but homosexuals in and of themselves have exactly the same civil rights as heterosexuals. They just choose not to exercise them.
4 posted on 08/29/2012 7:30:39 AM PDT by andyk (I have sworn upon the altar of God eternal hostility against every form of tyranny over the mind...)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 2 | View Replies]

To: andyk


5 posted on 08/29/2012 7:32:21 AM PDT by scottjewell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: kevinm13

Yes, those 2 public editors of the New York Times both saw and admitted this. As for the journalist and other professionals there, I don’t think they see it, so cannot admit it.

6 posted on 08/29/2012 7:33:33 AM PDT by scottjewell
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 3 | View Replies]

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794 is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson