The New York Times

[AlwaysAnarchy]

My dad's talking to this family friend right, and he mentioned some article in the New York Times and his friend says "Whoa, I don't read the New York Times, it's too bias and too liberal!"

So my question is, IS the New York Times liberal? I hear us use that word a lot, so if it is, does that mean it's "left wing"?? And closer to our side than say, the New York Post or Fox News?

[bloody_capitalist_sham]

Look, noam chomsky, the dude in your avatar, talks loads about this.

I think its one of his pet peeves that the New york times is "left wing" when they pretty much report the same stories and positions as the "conservative" media.

The fact the NYT backs the democratic party, and fox backs the republicans offers no indication of left right political spectrum, other than the most narrow spectrum....well not really a spectrum at all.

Liberal is not left.
the democrats are not left.
niether is the NYT or any other "liberal" newspaper or tv channel.

[Janus]

Some of the news agency could be said to lean a bit towards liberalism yet they are still particularly biased in favor of capitalism and the US government so it makes little difference if they're liberal in certain aspects.

[Guns of Brixton]

IS the New York Times liberal?

Yes.


...does that mean it's "left wing"?? And closer to our side than say, the New York Post or Fox News?

No.

Liberalism is a capitalist viewpoint. There is no linear scale from left to right. It is a matter of quality, not quantity. Neo-liberalism internationally and liberalism domestically are bourgeoisie.

The New York Times is the leading newspaper for the US bourgeoisie. Liberalism is the leading ideology of the bourgeoisie. More "backward" bourgeois ideologies (recently neo-conservatives) occasionally come to the fore as alternatives and serve useful purposes for the ruling class. But, liberalism is the strategically preferred ideology because it is so much more flexible and powerful at promoting the empire's interests.

[RebelDog]

There can be no real 'left-wing' mainstream papers or ones that are sypathetic to communism because they are all owned by millionares and thus take a pro-establishment view. Here in the UK the biggest selling daily paper is 'The Sun'. It is an anti-worker, racist, sexist waste of trees but it is targeted at and mainly bought by working class. I talk to so many workers who get their counter-productive, reactionary views from such garbage and its really disheartening. Things would be very different if the press was fair and the estamlishment know it. Newspapers are very important propaganda tools. Sometimes the so-called liberal papers are as reactionary as their right-wing rivals and some are even owned by the same people so they can capture more of the market.

[ahab]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2006 09:00 pm
My dad's talking to this family friend right, and he mentioned some article in the New York Times and his friend says "Whoa, I don't read the New York Times, it's too bias and too liberal!"

So my question is, IS the New York Times liberal? I hear us use that word a lot, so if it is, does that mean it's "left wing"?? And closer to our side than say, the New York Post or Fox News?
the new york times is liberal like CNN is, its not leftist

[Ricardo]

What would you say Time magazine is? My Political Science teacher says she reads The Economist which is far to the right and she gets Time which is way to the left. I never thought Time magazine was really leftist, but I guess with what you guys are saying she means liberal. Right?

[propertyistheft]

my friend gets the economist and he is a commie. Its simply about economics, doesnt hold any political party view. It does support capitalism though. But especially communists should know economics, so they know how to change ot for the better. As for the NYTimes it is liberal in the american perspective. But my dad doesnt read it because its too right wing. The way people classify left and right today are based upon the narrowest part of the political spectrum. Same with Time magazine

[Enragé]

the sick thing is, "liberal" in any country but the US (certainly europe), is right of the center in the political spectrum
liberalism is the ideology of capitalism.

if the NYT really is like CNN, then i can tell you its a propagandist rag.
And i get CNN europe, which is less fucked (so i've been told) than CNN in the US
so yeh
you get the idea?

[OneBrickOneVoice]

As a New Yorker who gets a free New York Times daily delivered to my door (glitch in the system I guess, I get the guy who used to live here's paper), I can say that the NYT pretty much says the same shit as everyone else. Just another bourgieous media source. Who gives a fuck if they're "liberal" or "conservative"

[Joby]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2006 11:58 pm
my friend gets the economist and he is a commie. Its simply about economics, doesnt hold any political party view. It does support capitalism though. But especially communists should know economics, so they know how to change ot for the better.
The nice thing about Economic magazines is they don't hind behind bullshit.

They don't say "liberating nations." They say "Opening a market"

As for the original topic, Did the NYT support the Transit Strikers?

HELLLLLL NO!

[Pawn Power]

In the U$ people concider it "liberal." But people it the rest of the world wont read that shit so the NY Times must make a different, even more "liberal," paper to sell to the world, The International Herald Tribune.

It is possible to find a decent artivle in the NY Times but you will have to read through a load of shit. My advice, dont waste your time.

[Severian]

Originally posted by [email protected] 19, 2006 06:32 pm
the sick thing is, "liberal" in any country but the US (certainly europe), is right of the center in the political spectrum
Yeah, "center" and "moderate are always relative. They don't have any permanent meaning.

The NYT has been called "the newspaper of record of the U.S. ruling class". But yes, it is part of the more liberal element of that ruling class.

[chimx]

the New York Times' editorial staff is certainly liberal in that they have always been large supporters of the Democratic party, but I certainly don't think this effects their journalistic integrity. Equally so, The Economists' foreign news coverage is top notch, despite the fact that their editorial staff tends to lean more right.