List of controversies involving The New York Times

The New York Times has been involved in many controversies since its foundation in 1851. It is one of the largest newspapers in the United States and the world,[1] and is considered to have worldwide influence and readership.[2][3] Controversies include allegations of biased and inaccurate reporting of the Russian Revolution, reporting on Wen Ho Lee's alleged theft of government documents, the Jayson Blair plagiarism scandal, articles by Judith Miller, the MoveOn.org ad controversy, the 2006 Duke lacrosse team scandal, the John McCain lobbyist controversy in 2008, and various accusations of: plagiarism, a leftist bias, Anti-Indian sentiment, Anti-British sentiment, and Antisemitism.

New York City’s hushed-up lead poisoning epidemic of 1848 to 1992

In his book The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster, Werner Troesken alleges that The New York Times, along with other widely popular news media sources and authorities, local to national, were being paid off to continually avoid alerting the public – and thus colluded in a massive cover-up – to a stream of experts' testimonies evidencing an urgent need to replace New York City's vintage lead water pipes with ones of iron.

According to Troesken, this cover-up was abetted by local, regional, and even national government departments and agencies, as well as by prominent medical associations, and helped contribute to an in-total 144-year-long regional epidemic of often-fatal neurotoxicity and widespread mild dementia from lead poisoning, caused by a prolonged chronic intake of New York City tap water.

Troesken cites statistics indicating that average lead intake levels in the region were initially up between 100 times and 200 times the limit set by the modern-day EPA, and although gradually attenuating over the decades, were still by the late 1930s at an average of more than several times over the far-too-high limits agreed upon by the government agencies of the time.

Troesken says that, in 1992, water treatments began clearing almost all lead content; he also writes that levels had still been present until then (in some small districts) as much as, at maximum, around three times the current EPA guideline for maximum daily lead intake per person.[4][5][6][7][8]

Troesken says that, at the very least, The New York Times failed to bring the issue of widespread lead poisoning to the public's attention when it possessed the knowledge and ability to do so.[9][10]

The Russian Revolution, 1917–1920

In 1920, Walter Lippmann and Charles Merz investigated the coverage of the Russian Revolution by The New York Times from 1917 to 1920. Their findings, published as a supplement of The New Republic, concluded that The New York Times' reporting was neither unbiased nor accurate, adding that the newspaper's news stories were not based on facts, but "were determined by the hopes of the men who made up the news organizations." Lippmann and Merz alleged that the newspaper referred to events that had not taken place, atrocities that did not exist, and that it reported no fewer than 91 times that the Bolshevik regime was on the verge of collapse. "The news about Russia is an example of what people wanted to see, not what happened," Lippmann and Merz wrote. "The main censor and the main propagandist was the hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors."[11][12][13]

Los Alamos investigation

In 1999, The New York Times ran a series of stories about alleged theft of classified documents from Los Alamos National Lab in New Mexico.[14][15][16] The prime suspect, Taiwan-born U.S. citizen Wen Ho Lee, had his name leaked to The New York Times by U.S. Energy Department officials.[17][18][19] Lee was indicted on 59 counts and jailed in solitary confinement for 278 days until he accepted a plea bargain from the government.[20][21] The alleged breach of security became a catalyst for the creation of the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). Lee was released after the government's case could not be proven.[22][23]

President Bill Clinton issued a public apology to Dr. Lee over his treatment.[20] The federal judge in charge of the case, James Aubrey Parker, remarked that "top decision makers in the executive branch ... have embarrassed our entire nation and each of us who is a citizen."[24][25] Lee filed a lawsuit under the Privacy Act alleging that officials had leaked false and incriminating information to the media before charges had been filed.[26] Lee's lawsuit was settled in 2006, just before the U.S. Supreme Court was set to decide whether to hear the case.[20] The issues were similar to those in the Plame affair criminal investigation, when The New York Times reporter Judith Miller spent two-and-a-half months in jail rather than reveal her government source.[20]

The 1619 Project

The 1619 Project, a long-form journalism project re-evaluating slavery and its legacy in the United States by investigative journalist Nikole Hannah-Jones, has been subject to substantial criticism.[27] A group of historians wrote to The New York Times Magazine,[28] expressing concern over what they alleged were inaccuracies and falsehoods fundamental to Hannah-Jones' reporting.[29] The magazine's editor-in-chief, Jake Silverstein, responded to the historians' letter in an editorial, in which he called into question the historical accuracy of some of the letter's claims.[30]

Anthrax attacks

In 2002, The New York Times columnist Nicholas Kristof wrote a series of columns[31][32] indirectly suggesting that Steven Hatfill, a former U.S. Army germ warfare researcher named as a "person of interest" by the FBI, might be a "likely culprit"[33][34] in the 2001 anthrax attacks.[35][36] Hatfill was never charged with any crime. In 2004, Hatfill sued The New York Times and Kristof for libel, claiming defamation and intentional infliction of emotional distress.[37] After years of proceedings,[38] the case was dismissed in 2007, and the dismissal was upheld on appeal. In 2008, the case was appealed to the U.S. Supreme Court which refused to grant certiorari, effectively leaving the dismissal in place. The basis for the dismissal was that Hatfill was a "public figure" and he had not proved malice on the part of The New York Times.[39]

Staff Resignations

Jayson Blair
Main article: Jayson Blair § Plagiarism and fabrication scandal

In 2003, The New York Times admitted that Jayson Blair, one of its reporters, had committed repeated journalistic fraud over a span of several years.[40] Blair immediately resigned following the incident. Questions of affirmative action in journalism were also raised,[41][42][43] since Blair is African American. Jonathan Landman, Blair's editor, said he felt that Blair's being Black played a large part in Blair being promoted in 2001 to a full-time staffer.[44] The paper's top two editors – Howell Raines, the executive editor, and Gerald M. Boyd, the managing editor – resigned their posts following the incident.[45]

Second Iraq War
Main article: Judith Miller § The Iraq War

Judith Miller wrote a series of prominently displayed articles[46] "strongly suggest[ing] Saddam Hussein already had or was acquiring an arsenal of weapons of mass destruction"[47] using Ahmed Chalabi as her source, prior to the 2003 invasion of Iraq. This aided the George W. Bush administration in making the case for war.[48][49]

Valerie Plame affair
Main article: Plame affair

In October 2005, Times reporter Judith Miller was released from prison after 85 days, when she agreed to testify to special prosecutor Patrick Fitzgerald’s grand jury after receiving a personal waiver, both on the phone and in writing, of her earlier confidential source agreement with Lewis "Scooter" Libby. No other reporter whose testimony had been sought in the case had received such a direct and particularized release. Her incarceration has helped fuel an effort in Congress to enact a federal shield law, comparable to the state shield laws which protect reporters in 31 of the 50 states. After her second appearance before the grand jury, Miller was released from her contempt of court finding. Miller resigned from the paper on November 9, 2005.[50]

Bari Weiss
Main article: Bari Weiss § 2020: Resignation from The New York Times

Conservative[51][52][53][54] opinion writer and editor, Bari Weiss, worked at the Times from 2017 to 2020. She resigned citing a "hostile work environment" and an overly restrictive editorial policy.[55]

National Security Agency revelations delayed

On December 16, 2005, an article by The New York Times revealed that the Bush administration had ordered the National Security Agency to intercept telephone conversations between suspected terrorists in the U.S. and those in other countries without first obtaining court warrants for the surveillance, apparently in violation of the Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act of 1978 and without the knowledge or consent of the Congress. A federal judge recently held that the plan revealed by the Times was unconstitutional, and hearings have been held on this issue in Congress. The article noted that reporters and editors at the Times had known about the intelligence-gathering program for approximately a year but had, at the request of White House officials, delayed publication to conduct additional reporting. The Justice Department has launched an investigation to determine the sources of the classified information obtained by the Times. The men who reported the stories, James Risen and Eric Lichtblau, won the Pulitzer Prize for national reporting in 2006.[56]

Because of the lapse in reporting Edward Snowden decided not to supply the New York Times with his information, choosing to go to the Guardian and Washington Post instead.[57]

Terrorist Finance Tracking Program
Terrorist Finance Tracking Program#Controversy regarding The New York Times' decision to publish

Much controversy was caused when, on June 23, 2006, The Times (along with the Wall Street Journal[58] and the Los Angeles Times[59]) revealed the existence of the Terrorist Finance Tracking Program, a CIA/Department of Treasury scheme to access transactional database of the Brussels-based Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication ("SWIFT"). In September 2006, the Belgian government declared that the SWIFT dealings with U.S. government authorities were, in fact, a breach of Belgian and European privacy laws.[60]

MoveOn.org ad controversy
Main article: MoveOn.org ad controversy

On Monday, September 10, 2007, the Times ran a full-page advertisement for MoveOn.org questioning the integrity of General David Petraeus, the commander of U.S. forces in Iraq, entitled "General Petraeus or General Betray Us?" The Times only charged MoveOn.org, a liberal activist group, $65,000 for the advertisement that, according to public relations director Abbe Serphos, normally costs around $181,692, or roughly a 64% discount. Serphos declined to explain the discount.[61]

Times spokeswoman Catherine Mathis denied the rate charged indicated a political bias and said it was the paper's policy not to disclose the rate paid by any advertiser. "We do not distinguish the advertising rates based on the political content of the ad," Mathis told Reuters. "The advertising folks did not see the content of the ad before the rate was quoted," she said, adding that there were over 30 different categories of ads with varying rates. Mathis confirmed the open rate for an ad of that size and type was around $181,000. Among reasons for lower rates are advertisers buying in bulk or taking a standby rate, she said. "There are many instances when we have published opinion advertisements that run counter to the stance we take on our own editorial pages," she said.

Jeff Jarvis, a journalism professor who blogs on media at buzzmachine.com, said the key question for the Times was could any other political or advocacy group get the same rate under the same circumstances. "The quandary the Times gets stuck in is they don't want to admit you can buy an ad for that rate, no matter who you are," Jarvis said, noting that with print advertising revenues in newspapers generally decline to offer big discounts.

On a more general note, Jarvis said U.S. papers should emulate their counterparts in Britain where, for example, The Guardian makes no effort to hide its liberal stance. "In the U.S., I would argue newspapers should be more transparent and open about the views taken ... and The (New York) Times is liberal," he said.[62]

Advertising Age reported that "MoveOn bought its ad on a 'standby' basis, under which it can ask for a day and placement in the paper but doesn't get any guarantees." A subsequent full-page ad bought by Republican presidential hopeful Rudy Giuliani to rebut MoveOn.org's original ad was purchased at the same standby rate. MoveOn later paid The Times the full rate once the newspaper publicly acknowledged that "an advertising sales representative made a mistake."[63]

Corporate-influence concerns

In their book Manufacturing Consent (1988), Edward S. Herman and Noam Chomsky analyze major U.S. media outlets, with an emphasis on The Times. They believe that a bias exists which is neither liberal nor conservative in nature, but aligned towards the interests of corporations, which own most of these media outlets and also provide the majority of their advertising revenue. The authors explain that this bias functions in all sorts of ways:[64]

"by selection of topics, by distribution of concerns, by emphasis and framing of issues, by filtering of information, by bounding of debate within certain limits. They determine, they select, they shape, they control, they restrict — in order to serve the interests of dominant, elite groups in the society."[65]

Chomsky and Herman also touch on the importance of this perceived bias in The Times:

"history is what appears in The New York Times archives; the place where people will go to find out what happened is The New York Times. Therefore it's extremely important if history is going to be shaped in an appropriate way, that certain things appear, certain things not appear, certain questions be asked, other questions be ignored, and that issues be framed in a particular fashion."[65]

Duke University lacrosse case reporting

In their 2007 book Until Proven Innocent: Political Correctness and the Shameful Injustice of the Duke Lacrosse Case, KC Johnson and Stuart Taylor, Jr. sharply criticize The New York Times for their editorial judgment and its effect on the case investigation. It says that the original reports by Joe Drape tended to exonerate the accused players, which contradicted Times' editorial stance. This led to Drape's quick dismissal and replacement by Duff Wilson who took a pro prosecution stance.[66]

Also covering the case, sports writer Selena Roberts, made assertions, that "Something happened March 13." Furthermore, Roberts writes, “Players have been forced to give up their DNA, but to the dismay of investigators, none have come forward to reveal an eyewitness account.” Johnson points out that this statement was not true. The captains’ March 28, 2006 statement or examined the defense attorneys’ subsequent press conference both described the captains’ cooperation with police, occurred before she penned her column. The Times never ran a correction. Later Roberts in an interview in the Big Lead said, "I wrote that a crime didn’t have to occur for us to inspect the irrefutable evidence of misogyny and race baiting that went on that night."[67]

Daniel Okrent, former Times ombudsman admitted to the bias in the Times coverage of the case. He said, "It was too delicious a story. It conformed too well to too many preconceived notions of too many in the press: white over black, rich over poor, athletes over non-athletes, men over women, educated over non-educated. Wow. That's a package of sins that really fit the preconceptions of a lot of us."[68]

John McCain-lobbyist article criticism
See also: John McCain lobbyist controversy, February 2008

The February 21, 2008 The New York Times published an article on John McCain's alleged relationship with lobbyist Vicki Iseman and other involvement with special interest groups.[69] The article received a widespread criticism among both liberals and conservatives, McCain supporters and non-supporters as well as talk radio personalities. Robert S. Bennett, whom McCain had hired to represent him in this matter, defended McCain's character. Bennett, who was the special investigator during the Keating Five scandal that The Times revisited in the article, said that he fully investigated McCain back then and suggested to the Senate Ethics Committee to not pursue charges against McCain.

"And if there is one thing I am absolutely confident of, it is John McCain is an honest and honest man. I recommended to the Senate Ethics Committee that he be cut out of the case, that there was no evidence against him, and I think for the New York Times to dig this up just shows that Senator McCain's public statement about this is correct. It's a smear job. I'm sorry. "[70]

Former staffer to President Bill Clinton and Hillary Clinton campaigner Lanny Davis said the article "had no merit." Stating that he did not support McCain's bid for the White House, Davis, who had himself lobbied for the same cause Iseman lobbied McCain for, said that McCain only wrote a letter to the FCC to ask them to "act soon" and refused to write a letter that supported the sale of the television station the article talked about.[71] Journalistic observers also criticized the article, albeit in a milder language. Tom Rosenstiel, the director of the Project for Excellence in Journalism, suggested that the article does not make clear the nature of McCain's alleged "inappropriate" behavior: "The phrasing is just too vague."[72] The article was later criticized by the White House[73] and by several news organizations including the San Francisco Chronicle editorial board.[74] Commentator Bill O'Reilly raised the question about why the paper had endorsed McCain on January 25, 2008 for the Republican nomination if they had information that alleged an inappropriate relationship.[75] The Boston Globe, owned by the Times, declined to publish the story, choosing instead to run a version of the same story written by the competing Washington Post staff. That version focused almost exclusively on the pervasive presence of lobbyists in McCain's campaign and did not mention the sexual relationship that the Times article hinted at.[76]

In response to the criticism, the Times editor Bill Keller was "surprised by the volume" and "by how lopsided the opinion was against our decision [to publish the article]".[77] The diverse sentiments by the readers were summarized in a separate article by Clark Hoyt, the Times public editor, who concluded: "I think it is wrong to report the suppositions or concerns of anonymous aides about whether the boss is getting into the wrong bed."[78]

In September 2008, a McCain senior aide (Steve Schmidt) charged: "Whatever The New York Times once was, it is today not by any standard a journalistic organization. It is a pro-Obama advocacy organization that every day impugns the McCain campaign, attacks Sen. McCain, attacks Gov. Palin. ... Everything that is read in The New York Times that attacks this campaign should be evaluated by the American people from that perspective."

In December 2008, Iseman filed a lawsuit against The New York Times, alleging that the paper had defamed her by, in her view, falsely implying that she had an illicit romantic relationship with McCain.[79] In February 2009, the suit "was settled without payment and The Times did not retract the article."[80] Unusually, however, The Times agreed to publish a statement from Iseman's lawyers on the Times website.[80]

Alessandra Stanley errors

Alessandra Stanley is a television critic. Complaints were raised regarding the accuracy of her reporting.[81][82][83][84] Her tribute to Walter Cronkite on July 18, 2009 had eight factual errors.[83][84][85] Clark Hoyt, the public editor of The New York Times described Stanley as "much admired by editors for the intellectual heft of her coverage of television" but "with a history of errors".[81][82] The New York Times printed a correction:

An appraisal on Saturday about Walter Cronkite’s career included a number of errors. In some copies, it misstated the date that Martin Luther King Jr. was killed and referred incorrectly to Cronkite’s coverage of D-Day. King was killed on April 4, 1968, not April 30. Mr. Cronkite covered the D-Day landing from a warplane; he did not storm the beaches. In addition, Neil Armstrong set foot on the moon on July 20, 1969, not July 26. “The CBS Evening News” overtook “The Huntley-Brinkley Report” on NBC in the ratings during the 1967-68 television season, not after Chet Huntley retired in 1970. A communications satellite used to relay correspondents’ reports from around the world was Telstar, not Telestar. Howard K. Smith was not one of the CBS correspondents Mr. Cronkite would turn to for reports from the field after he became anchor of “The CBS Evening News” in 1962; he left CBS before Mr. Cronkite was the anchor. Because of an editing error, the appraisal also misstated the name of the news agency for which Mr. Cronkite was Moscow bureau chief after World War II. At that time it was United Press, not United Press International.[85]

An earlier contentious wording was on September 5, 2005 in an article on Hurricane Katrina where she wrote "Fox's Geraldo Rivera did his rivals one better: yesterday, he nudged an Air Force rescue worker out of the way so his camera crew could tape him as he helped lift an older woman in a wheelchair to safety." The Times later acknowledged that no nudge was visible on the broadcast tape.[84][86]

Anti-Indian sentiment
See also: Anti-Indian sentiment § New York Times

The newspaper's coverage of India has been heavily criticized by Sumit Ganguly, a professor of political science, for its "hectoring" and "patronizing" tone towards India. He finds anti-India bias in coverage of the Kashmir Conflict, the Hyde Act and other India-related matters.[87] Similar charges of racism against Indians have been levelled by the Huffington Post.[88]

United States lawmaker Kumar P. Barve described a recent editorial on India as full of "blatant and unprofessional factual errors or omissions" and having a "haughty, condescending, arrogant and patronizing" tone.[89] In September 2014, The New York Times published a cartoon showing a stereotypical Indian turban-wearing man with a cow knocking at the door of an "elite space club". This was their response to recent accomplishments by the Indian Space Research Organization.[90] The cartoon "drew immediate criticism for being racist in content, and for engaging in classist and racist stereotyping".[91]

The New York Times has also opposed India's entry into the Nuclear Suppliers Group[92] while the US administration led by President Barack Obama was actively supporting India's membership.[93] This view was criticized for Indophobic bias by several western and Indian experts on nuclear issues.[94][95] The New York Times has also published editorials attacking traditional Indian dress sari as a "conspiracy by Hindu Nationalists",[96] which was widely criticized for ignorance and grossly representing the sari[97][98] and for promoting Orientalism.[99][100]

In March 2019, The New York Times received sharp criticism when it referred to the Pulwama suicide bombing, which was carried out by the Pakistani terrorist outfit JeM as an "explosion". The headline of the article read "In India's Election Season, an Explosion Interrupts Modi's Slump". The wording was later corrected after receiving a massive critical response, including from the former Pakistani ambassador to the US.[101]

Abu Huzaifa al-Kanadi

Caliphate, a podcast for The New York Times, has received criticism numerous times after Abu Huzaifa al-Kanadi admitted on the podcast that he “murdered people” while he was fighting for the Islamic State group.[102] Numerous conservatives called for action against him after his statement, including Candice Bergen.[103] She criticized the liberal government after not ordering law enforcement against him. Bergen also called for Public Safety Minister Ralph Goodale to reveal whether the government knows where he is or not, but Goodale stated that it was the “opposition of keeping Canadians safe”.[104] Huzaifa also received concerns from television journalist Diana Swain that he may be “lying” to The New York Times or CBC News.[105]

In December 2020 the New York Times "admitted <...> that it could not verify the claims" made in the podcast.[106] Later the podcast has been withdrawn as Pulitzer finalist.[107]

Anti-British sentiment

In January 2020, Douglas Murray claimed that The New York Times was "waging a culture war vendetta against" the United Kingdom "but in doing so it is waging a campaign of misinformation against its own readers".[108] Kelly Jane Torrance at The Spectator, said "Ever since Britain voted to leave the European Union, the Gray Lady — as the paper is known, thanks to its pompous and earnest tone — has become relentlessly critical of the UK". Torrance went on to say "If you were to read only the NYT, you’d think there was little hope for backward, bigoted Britain".[109]

Publishing leaked photos from the Manchester bombing

On May 24, 2017, The New York Times caused outrage among the British police and government when it published leaked photos showing the scene of the Manchester Arena bombing. Counter terror police chiefs said the leak undermined their investigation and victims' and witnesses' confidence. The New York Times published photos it says were gathered by UK authorities at the scene of the attack, including the remnants of a backpack, nuts and screws, and a device identified as a "possible detonator". Greater Manchester Police were said to be "furious" and said they would stop sharing information with the US. President Donald Trump the next day in a NATO summit condemned the media leaks, calling it "deeply troubling" and a "grave threat to our national security". The New York Times defended its decision to publish the photos, saying they were "neither graphic nor disrespectful of victims".[110][111]

Yorkshire pudding

In May 2018 the New York Times came under criticism, including from the tourist office of the city of York, for describing Yorkshire pudding as a "large, fluffy pancake" and recommending it be served with "syrup, preserves, confectioners' sugar or cinnamon sugar". A presenter for the BBC stated that the Yorkshire pudding's history was longer than that of the USA.[112]

London restaurants

In August 2018, Robert Draper alleged the UK had been subsisting mostly "on porridge and boiled mutton" until very recently.[113] Douglas Murray dismissed the attack as archaic and wrong.[108] Draper had also frequently referred to London's Mayfair as "Mayfield" in the article that had to be corrected at a later date.[114]

Claims of a racism and extremism

In May 2018, Maya Goodfellow, a writer for the New York Times and The Guardian wrote a piece titled "A New Face Won’t Change the British Government’s Racist Heart". Goodfellow claimed that the appointment of Sajid Javid as Chancellor of the Exchequer became "a shield for a government’s institutionally racist policies". In the piece, Goodfellow provided no evidence of any alleged racist policies.[115] Kelly Jane Torrance at The Spectator said the piece "focused on Javid’s race and decried the ‘cruel’ and ‘inhumane’ immigration policies of the Conservative government. It did not note that immigration is still running at record levels.[109] In March 2019,Sam Byers wrote a piece for The New York Times titled "Britain Is Drowning Itself in Nostalgia". Byers described the UK as “poisoned” with “colonial arrogance” and suggested it was a "solipsistic backwater".[116] Douglas Murray compared the piece to a work of fiction.[108] In June 2019, sociological theorist William Davies wrote a piece called "A Fanatical Sect Has Hijacked British Politics".[117] Douglas Murray argued "What was this fanatical sect? ISIS? Extinction Rebellion? Followers of Krusty the Clown? No, the paper disappointingly revealed that the people in question were Brexit supporters and the evidence that they had hijacked British politics was that they had persuaded the UK Government to exit the European Union."[108]

British beaches

In June 2020, a piece by Ceylan Yeğinsu claimed, that during a heatwave, British people have "cavorted by the hundreds in swamps".[118] After The Times in the UK, called them out on the tone and factual error, the article was subsequently changed. In a correction, The New York Times stated "People flocked to parks, beaches and streams, not swamps".[119]

Putin-Trump kiss cartoon

After the Times tweeted a cartoon portraying Trump and Putin as a gay lovers, LGBT activist and Democratic Rep. Brian Sims said it's time to stop the homophobic jokes.[120] American transgender activist Jeffrey Marsh said "to have a group that's as well-established as The New York Times personally attacking you feels horrendous."[121]

A spokesperson for the Times defended the animation.[121]

Anti-Chinese sentiment

Chinese netizens reacted violently to quotation symbols which were put around "terrorist" by the Times when describing the 2014 Kunming attack. This was the same style used by most international publications as well as the US government.[122]

Outdated figures about the carbon output of China were used by the Times in a 2015 article.[123]

Hiring of Sarah Jeong

In August 2018, the Times hired Sarah Jeong to join its editorial board as lead writer on technology, commencing in September.[124] The hiring sparked a strongly negative reaction in conservative media, which highlighted derogatory tweets about white people that Jeong had posted mostly in 2013 and 2014.[125][126] Critics characterized her tweets as being racist; Jeong said that the posts were "counter-trolling" in reaction to harassment she had experienced, and that she regretted adopting this tactic.[125] The Times stated that it had reviewed her social media history before hiring her, and that it did not condone the posts.[125][126]

Coverage of the Holocaust

The Times has been criticized for its coverage of the Holocaust. According to the 2005 book "Buried by the Times" by Laurel Leff, it buried in the back pages of the paper stories about the genocide of European Jews, and avoided mentions of Jewish victims of persecutions, deportations, and death camps. Between 1939 and 1945, the Times published more than 23,000 front-page stories - a half of which were about World War II - and only 26 were about the Holocaust. In the documentary Reporting on The Times: How the paper of record ignored the Holocaust, past editors of the newspaper stated that there was a conscious decision to bury the paper’s Holocaust coverage.[127]

According to analysis, the Times publisher at the time, Arthur Hays Sulzberger (who was Jewish), feared that the paper would be considered as favoring Jews and lose credibility by reporting these stories; writer Anna Blech stated he wanted so "badly to be neutral about Jewish issues, that he adopted an absurd and immoral stance", as lives could have been saved otherwise. Further, the paper wanted to reflect the sentiments of the US government and the American public at the time.[128]

Letters by Sulzberger show that while he identified as Jewish, he didn't think Judaism is anything more than a religious category, and didn't "relate" to the persecuted European Jewry more than other groups. In September 1996, The New York Times released a statement regarding accusation of it "underplaying the Holocaust while it was taking place. Clippings from the paper show that the criticism is valid.”[129]

Accusations of anti-Semitism

Anti-Semitic cartoons

On April 25, 2019, the Times international edition included a cartoon featuring U.S. President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Trump was shown wearing a kippah and Netanyahu was displayed as Trump's dog wearing a collar with the Star of David. The Israeli edition of the newspaper was published at the end of Passover. After criticism from public and religious figures, the Times affirmed it used "anti-Semitic tropes".[130]

On April 29, the Times came under scrutiny again for publishing another anti-Semitic cartoon featuring Netanyahu.[131]

Anti-Semitic political editor

On August 22, 2019, a politics desk editor at the Times, Tom Wright-Piersanti, was revealed to have posted several anti-Semitic tweets while working at another outlet before joining the Times. He had posted several anti-Indian tweets as well. His tweets included phrases such as "Crappy Jew Year," and "Jew police." The Times reconsidered his future, but ultimately decided to continue his employment.[132][133]

Accusation of plagiarism

According to the Moscow Times, Kremlin-critical Russian journalist Roman Badanin, editor-in-chief of independent Russian media outlet Proekt (Project), said that at least two of the Times articles criticizing Russia, which won the Pulitzer Prize in May 2020, repeated findings of Proekt's articles published a few months before.[134]

Accusation of pro-Iranian sentiment

In January 2021, secret Iranian agent Kaveh L. Afrasiabi was arrested and charged with being an unregistered agent of the Iranian government.[135] After his arrest, a report from the Algemeiner Journal found that Afrasiabi had written for the Times as an opinion writer, with the newspaper having published more than a dozen of his articles.[135]

See also

References
  1. "Top 10 U.S. Daily Newspapers". Cision. Archived from the original on July 22, 2019. Retrieved July 13, 2019.
  2. "Is The Washington Post closing in on the Times?". Politico. Retrieved November 5, 2017.
  3. "News of the world". The Economist. March 17, 2012. ISSN 0013-0613. Retrieved November 5, 2017.
  4. Werner Troesken, The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2006); Prologue; pg. 5-7. ISBN 0262201674, 9780262201674.
  5. Werner Troesken, The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2006); Prologue; pg. 6-7. ISBN 0262201674, 9780262201674.
  6. Assessing the effect of water meter installation on exposure to lead in water (PDF). DEFRA. October 2016. Retrieved 9 October 2019.
  7. Hayes, Colin R.; Hydes, Owen D. (September 2012). "UK experience in the monitoring and control of lead in drinking water". Journal of Water and Health. 10 (3): 337–348. doi:10.2166/wh.2012.210. PMID 22960478
  8. "Public Health Service". Federal Register. Retrieved November 13, 2020.
  9. Werner Troesken, The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2006); Prologue; pg. 5. ISBN 0262201674, 9780262201674.
  10. Werner Troesken, The Great Lead Water Pipe Disaster (Cambridge MA: MIT Press, 2006); Prologue; pg. 5-6. ISBN 0262201674, 9780262201674.
  11. Goldstein, Tom (2007). Killing the Messenger: 100 Years of Media Criticism. Columbia University Press. ISBN 978-0-231-11833-0. Archived from the original on May 5, 2020. Retrieved December 25, 2019.
  12. Lippmann, Walter (September 19, 2012). Liberty and the News. Courier Corporation. ISBN 978-0-486-13636-3. Archived from the original on May 5, 2020. Retrieved December 25, 2019.
  13. Auerbach, Jonathan; Castronovo, Russ (November 13, 2013). The Oxford Handbook of Propaganda Studies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-933185-7. Archived from the original on May 6, 2020. Retrieved December 25, 2019.
  14. James Risen and Jeff Gerth (March 6, 1999), "BREACH AT LOS ALAMOS: A special report; China Stole Nuclear Secrets For Bombs, U.S. Aides Say" (includes extensive corrections) Archived November 19, 2019, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  15. James Risen (March 16, 1999), "Los Alamos Scientist Admits Contacts With Chinese, U.S. Says" Archived October 31, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  16. James Risen (April 11, 1999), " F.B.I. Searches Home of Researcher Fired From Los Alamos" Archived October 31, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  17. James Risen (May 8, 1999), "Lawyer Issues Denial for Los Alamos Scientist Suspected of Spying for Beijing" Archived October 31, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  18. James Risen (Aug. 7, 1999), "Security Issues May Delay Los Alamos Case, U.S. Says" Archived October 31, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  19. James Risen (Sept. 11, 1999), "Los Alamos Punishes 3 for Role in Spy Inquiry" Archived October 31, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  20. Bill Mears (May 22, 2006). "Deal in Wen Ho Lee case may be imminent". CNN. Archived from the original on July 12, 2016. Retrieved November 7, 2008.
  21. Patsy T. Mink, George Miller, Nancy Pelosi (Oct. 12, 2000), 146 Cong. Rec. (Bound) 22416 - INVESTIGATION AND TREATMENT OF WEN HO LEE Archived November 4, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, U.S. House of Representatives proceedings in Congressional Record
  22. Jeffrey St. Clair; Alexander Cockburn (Jan. 5, 2018), "James Risen, the New York Times and the Sliming of Wen Ho Lee" Archived November 8, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, CounterPunch
  23. Wen Ho Lee; Helen Zia (2001), My Country Versus Me: The first-hand account by the Los Alamos scientist who was falsely accused of being a spy Archived November 8, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, Hyperion, pp. 1–5
  24. NYTimes (Sept. 14, 2000), "Statement by Judge in Los Alamos Case, With Apology for Abuse of Power" Archived November 8, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  25. Jeremy Wu (March 12, 2018), "Revisiting Judge Parker’s Apology to Dr. Wen Ho Lee", Linkedin
  26. Wen Ho Lee; Helen Zia (2001). My Country Versus Me: The first-hand account by the Los Alamos scientist who was falsely accused of being a spy. Hyperion. p. 320. ISBN 978-0-7868-6803-2. Archived from the original on May 5, 2020. Retrieved October 31, 2018.
  27. Sullivan, Andrew (September 13, 2019). "The New York Times Has Abandoned Liberalism for Activism". Intelligencer. Retrieved July 10, 2020.
  28. "Twelve Scholars Critique the 1619 Project and the New York Times Magazine Editor Responds | History News Network". historynewsnetwork.org. Retrieved July 10, 2020.
  29. Serwer, Adam (December 23, 2019). "The Fight Over the 1619 Project Is Not About the Facts". The Atlantic. Retrieved July 10, 2020.
  30. "We Respond to the Historians Who Critiqued The 1619 Project". The New York Times. December 20, 2019. ISSN 0362-4331. Retrieved July 10, 2020.
  31. Nicholas Kristof (Jan. 4, 2002), "Profile of a Killer" Archived November 6, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  32. Nicholas Kristof (May 24, 2002), "Connecting Deadly Dots" Archived October 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  33. Nicholas Kristof (July 2, 2002), "Anthrax? The F.B.I. Yawns" Archived October 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  34. Nicholas Kristof (July 12, 2002), "The Anthrax Files" Archived October 28, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  35. Nicholas Kristof (July 19, 2002), "Case of the Missing Anthrax" Archived October 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  36. Nicholas Kristof (Aug. 13, 2002), "The Anthrax Files" Archived October 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  37. Jerry Markon (July 14, 2004). "Former Army Scientist Sues New York Times, Columnist". The Washington Post. Archived from the original on August 8, 2007. Retrieved March 21, 2008.
  38. "Steven J. Hatfill v. The New York Times Company, and Nicholas Kristof, 416 F.3d 320" Archived May 2, 2020, at the Wayback Machine, CourtListener.com
  39. Kathleen Cullinan (Dec. 15, 2008), "Supreme Court won't hear Hatfill's libel suit" Archived October 29, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, Reporters Committee for Freedom of the Press
  40. Dan Barry; David Barstow; Jonathan D. Glater; Adam Liptak; Jacques Steinberg (May 13, 2003). "Correcting the Record: Times Reporter Who Resigned Leaves Long Trail of Deception". The New York Times. Archived from the original on April 23, 2009. Retrieved September 22, 2006.
  41. Kaus, Mickey (May 12, 2003). ""Affirmative retraction at the NYT" also titled "Keller in the Cellar?"". Slate online magazine. Archived from the original on May 22, 2006. Retrieved September 24, 2006.
  42. Shafer, Jack, "The Jayson Blair Project How did he bamboozle the New York Times?" "Pressbox" column, Slate online magazine, May 8, 2003
  43. Calame, Byron (June 18, 2006). ""Preventing a Second Jason Blair" ("The Public Editor" column)". The New York Times. Archived from the original on August 11, 2018. Retrieved September 22, 2006.
  44. "Jayson Blair: A Case Study of What Went Wrong at The New York Times". PBS NewsHour. December 10, 2004. Archived from the original on August 19, 2008. Retrieved October 19, 2020.
  45. Arce, Rose & Shannon Troetel (March 1, 2004). "Top New York Times editors quit". CNN. Archived from the original on March 27, 2008. Retrieved August 3, 2007.
  46. "The Times and Iraq: A Sample of the Coverage". The New York Times. Archived from the original on July 11, 2017. Retrieved May 21, 2017. "sampling of articles published by The Times about the decisions that led the United States into the war in Iraq, and especially the issue of Iraq's weapons"
  47. Byron Calame (Oct. 23, 2005), "The Miller Mess: Lingering Issues Among the Answers" Archived November 28, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  48. Franklin Foer. "The Source of the Trouble". New York magazine. Archived from the original on December 2, 2016. Retrieved September 28, 2014. Pulitzer Prize winner Judith Miller’s series of exclusives about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq, courtesy of the now-notorious Ahmad Chalabi—helped the New York Times keep up with the competition and the Bush administration bolster the case for war.
  49. NYTimes Editors (May 26, 2004), "FROM THE EDITORS; The Times and Iraq" Archived October 25, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, The New York Times
  50. Judith Miller (November 9, 2005). "Judith Miller's Farewell". Archived from the original on November 12, 2006. Retrieved November 4, 2006.
  51. "Conservative, Jewish NY Times columnists slam Israel for BDS 'paranoia'". The Times of Israel. October 10, 2018. Archived from the original on February 2, 2019. Retrieved February 1, 2019.
  52. Cagle, Tess (May 19, 2018). "Conservative columnist says the NRA has Trump 'grabbed by the p***y'". The Daily Dot. Archived from the original on April 23, 2019. Retrieved February 1, 2019.
  53. Relman, Eliza (September 19, 2018). "New York Times opinion writer Bari Weiss slammed for questioning whether sexual assault should disqualify Kavanaugh from Supreme Court". Business Insider. Archived from the original on April 2, 2019. Retrieved December 11, 2018.
  54. Landau, Noa (October 10, 2018). "Leading Conservative NYT Columnists Slam Israel Over Detention of U.S. Student". Haaretz. Archived from the original on April 13, 2019. Retrieved January 4, 2019.
  55. "Resignation Letter". Bari Weiss. Retrieved November 20, 2020.
  56. Columbia University Graduate School of Journalism (2006). "2006 Pulitzer Prize Winners - NATIONAL REPORTING". The Pulitzer Board. Archived from the original on November 2, 2006. Retrieved November 4, 2006.
  57. "New York Times Editor: Losing Snowden Scoop 'Really Painful'". National Public Radio. June 5, 2014. Archived from the original on September 18, 2014. Retrieved September 28, 2014. But Snowden already knew the one place he didn't trust: The New York Times. He went instead to reporters working for The Guardian and The Washington Post, each of which posted the first in a series of breathtaking revelations one year ago
  58. "Bank Records Secretly Tapped". 2008. Archived from the original on October 1, 2007. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  59. "Los Angeles Times : Page Not Found". 2008. Archived from the original on July 11, 2006. Retrieved February 24, 2008. Cite uses generic title (help)
  60. Dan Bilefsky & Eric Lichtblau (September 29, 2006). "Belgians Say Banking Group Broke European Rules in Giving Data to U.S". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 11, 2017. Retrieved September 26, 2008.
  61. "Times Gives Lefties A Hefty Discount For 'Betray Us' Ad". New York Post. 2008. Archived from the original on February 25, 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  62. Claudia Parsons (September 13, 2007). "NY Times criticized for ad attacking top US general". Reuters. Archived from the original on October 13, 2007. Retrieved September 13, 2007. An ad criticizing the top U.S. general in Iraq raised charges on Thursday that The New York Times slashed its advertising rates for political reasons -- an accusation denied by the paper.
  63. Kate Phillips (September 23, 2007). "MoveOn to Pay Full Times Ad Rate". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 17, 2008. Retrieved September 26, 2008.
  64. "Manufacturing Consent: A Propaganda Model: excerpted from the book". Archived from the original on March 14, 2007. Retrieved March 20, 2007.
  65. "Excerpts from Manufacturing Consent: Noam Chomsky interviewed by various interviewers". Archived from the original on July 21, 2006. Retrieved July 19, 2006.
  66. Clay Waters (September 19, 2007). "New Book Destroys Credibility of NYT's Duke Lacrosse 'Rape' Coverage". newsbusters.org. Archived from the original on July 24, 2008. Retrieved September 26, 2008.
  67. "Archived copy". Archived from the original on December 10, 2008. Retrieved October 8, 2008.CS1 maint: archived copy as title (link)
  68. Smolkin, Rachel. "Justice Delayed". American Journalism Review - Archives (August/September 2007). American Journalism Review. Archived from the original on December 13, 2019. Retrieved May 25, 2020.
  69. Rutenberg, Jim; Thompson, Marilyn W.; Kirkpatrick, David D.; Labaton, Stephen (2008). "For McCain, Self-Confidence on Ethics Poses Its Own Risk - New York Times". The New York Times. Archived from the original on December 9, 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  70. Sean Hannity & Alan Colmes (February 21, 2008). "Bob Bennett Reacts to New York Times Story on John McCain". Fox News Channell. Archived from the original on February 26, 2008. Retrieved February 25, 2008.
  71. Ralph Z. Hallow & Jennifer Harper (February 22, 2008). "McCain disputes report of lobbyist relationship". The Washington Times. Retrieved February 25, 2008.
  72. "Article is in the eye of a storm". February 22, 2008. Archived from the original on April 18, 2014. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  73. "White House Accuses NYT of Anti-GOP Bias". Associated Press. February 23, 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  74. "Follow the innuendo". 2008. Archived from the original on February 26, 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  75. Bill O'Reilly (February 22, 2008). "Did The New York Times Smear John McCain?". Fox News Channel. Archived from the original on March 7, 2008. Retrieved March 3, 2008.
  76. "Top of the Ticket : Los Angeles Times : Boston Globe declines to publish parent paper's McCain story". 2008. Archived from the original on February 28, 2008. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  77. "Howard Kurtz - N.Y. Times' Editor Bill Keller Responds to McCain Flap - washingtonpost.com". The Washington Post. 2008. Archived from the original on June 28, 2011. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  78. Hoyt, Clark (2008). "What That McCain Article Didn't Say". The New York Times. Archived from the original on May 23, 2017. Retrieved February 24, 2008.
  79. Fletcher, Paul; Cooper, Alan (December 30, 2008). "Lobbyist Vicki Iseman files $27M suit against New York Times". Virginia Lawyers Weekly. Archived from the original on January 5, 2009. Retrieved December 31, 2008.
  80. Richard Pérez-Peña, Libel Suit Against The Times Ends Archived September 2, 2017, at the Wayback Machine, New York Times (February 19, 2009).
  81. James Rainey (August 5, 2009). "Cronkite blunder a revealing look inside New York Times". Los Angeles Times. Archived from the original on August 6, 2009. Retrieved August 6, 2009. Wasn't the public fascinated, after all, to learn that Stanley and the nation's Paper of Record managed eight mistakes in an almost 1,200-word tribute to Uncle Walter?
  82. Clark Hoyt (August 1, 2009). "How Did This Happen?". New York Times. Archived from the original on July 9, 2011. Retrieved August 6, 2009. The Times published an especially embarrassing correction on July 22, fixing seven errors in a single article — an appraisal of Walter Cronkite, the CBS anchorman famed for his meticulous reporting. The newspaper had wrong dates for historic events; gave incorrect information about Cronkite’s work, his colleagues and his program’s ratings; misstated the name of a news agency, and misspelled the name of a satellite.
  83. "Alessandra Stanley Corrected Hard". Gawker.com. Archived from the original on December 27, 2009. Retrieved December 29, 2009. There are corrections and then there are Corrections, and error-prone New York Times mistaker Alessandra Stanley got corrected today. For the second time. For the same Walter Cronkite story.
  84. Craig Silverman (July 24, 2009). "Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong, Wrong". Columbia Journalism Review. Columbia University. Archived from the original on July 27, 2009. Retrieved July 27, 2009. In fairness, I’ll emphasize that the story’s seventh mistake was the result of an editing error. But six errors in a story she had ample time to work on and check is not acceptable, especially for a reporter with such a troubling history of error. ...
  85. Alessandra Stanley (July 17, 2009). "Cronkite's Signature: Approachable Authority (correction appended)". The New York Times. Archived from the original on March 31, 2011. Retrieved December 29, 2009. An appraisal on Saturday about Walter Cronkite’s career included a number of errors. In some copies, it misstated ...
  86. Alessandra Stanley (September 5, 2005). "Reporters Turn From Deference to Outrage". The New York Times. Archived from the original on February 25, 2013. Retrieved December 29, 2009.
  87. Hillary, India And 'The New York Times' Archived April 13, 2018, at the Wayback Machine, Sumit Ganguly, Forbes Magazine
  89. "Indian-American lawmaker blasts NYT for anti-India editorial". The Indian Express. The Indian Express Limited. July 21, 2009. Archived from the original on September 23, 2009. Retrieved June 18, 2012.
  90. "India's Budget Mission to Mars". The New York Times. September 28, 2014. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on October 8, 2017. Retrieved July 26, 2016.
  91. Writer, Sharanya Haridas; Mumbai-raised, Journalist; dream, Manhattan-residing Accidental Author-Publisher-Entrepreneur I. am Guy Kawasaki's (September 30, 2014). "The 'New York Times' Publishes Racist Comic About India's Space Mission". The Huffington Post. Archived from the original on September 15, 2016. Retrieved July 26, 2016.
  92. The Editorial Board (June 4, 2016). "No Exceptions for a Nuclear India". The New York Times. ISSN 0362-4331. Archived from the original on July 9, 2016. Retrieved July 21, 2016.
  93. "President Obama backs Indian entry to nuclear technology – BBC News". Archived from the original on April 1, 2019. Retrieved July 21, 2016.
  94. Thakur, Ramesh (June 9, 2016). "The New York Times's Bias Should Not Surprise Us Anymore – The Wire". The Wire. Archived from the original on July 20, 2016. Retrieved July 21, 2016.
  95. "Asia Unbound » India, Global Governance, and the Nuclear Suppliers Group". Archived from the original on July 18, 2016. Retrieved July 21, 2016.
  96. Qadri, Asgar (November 12, 2017). "In India, Fashion Has Become a Nationalist Cause". Archived from the original on August 11, 2018. Retrieved April 12, 2018.
  97. Surendran, Vivek (November 14, 2017). "Indian Twitter users roast New York Times for sari state of affairs". Archived from the original on December 18, 2017. Retrieved April 12, 2018.
  98. Dutt, Barkha (November 17, 2017). "The New York Times tried to explain sari fashion — and became the laughingstock of India". Archived from the original on February 28, 2018. Retrieved April 12, 2018.
  99. Gautam, Nishtha. "Back Off NYT, I'm a Sari & I'm Not a Tool in the Hands of Hindutva". Archived from the original on December 24, 2017. Retrieved April 12, 2018.
  100. Kaur, Nehmat (November 15, 2017). "The Sari Has Never Been About a 'Hindu' Identity". Archived from the original on January 7, 2018. Retrieved April 12, 2018.
  101. "New York Times calls Pulwama bombing an explosion. Twitterati ask: Was 9/11 a plane crash?". India Today. Ist. Archived from the original on April 8, 2020. Retrieved September 9, 2019.
  102. Buller, Alice (June 5, 2018). "New York Times podcast 'Caliphate' faces backlash over ethics". Arab News. Archived from the original on June 9, 2018. Retrieved June 16, 2018.
  103. "Conservative MPs call for action on self-described terror recruit for Daesh reportedly in Toronto". Toronto Star. The Canadian Press. May 11, 2018. Archived from the original on June 16, 2018. Retrieved June 16, 2018.
  104. Khandaker, Tamara (May 11, 2018). "Politicians are freaking out over a podcast about returned Canadian ISIS fighter". Vice News.
  105. Swain, Diana (May 19, 2018). "Did former Canadian ISIS member lie to the New York Times or to CBC News?". CBC News. Archived from the original on June 16, 2018. Retrieved June 16, 2018.
  106. "New York Times: 'Caliphate' podcast didn't meet standards". AP NEWS. December 18, 2020. Retrieved December 29, 2020.
  107. "NYT's 'Caliphate' podcast withdrawn as Pulitzer finalist". AP NEWS. December 22, 2020. Retrieved December 29, 2020.
  108. "The New York Times' bizarre campaign against Britain". Unherd. UnHerd. January 17, 2020. Retrieved July 5, 2020.
  109. "What's the New York Times's problem with Britain?". The Spectator. The Spectator. June 1, 2018. Retrieved July 5, 2020.
  110. "Manchester attack: Trump condemns media leaks". May 25, 2017. Archived from the original on May 25, 2017. Retrieved June 22, 2018.
  111. "Manchester attack: 'Fury' at US 'evidence' photos leak". May 25, 2017. Archived from the original on May 24, 2017. Retrieved June 22, 2018.
  112. "New York Times thinks Yorkshire pudding is a dessert". BBC News. May 15, 2018. Archived from the original on May 15, 2018. Retrieved May 15, 2018.
  113. "Beyond Porridge and Boiled Mutton: A Taste of London". New York Times. New York Times. August 15, 2018. Retrieved July 5, 2020.
  114. "In Britain, austerity is changing everything". New York Times. New York Times. May 28, 2018. Retrieved July 5, 2020.
  115. "A New Face Won't Change the British Government's Racist Heart". New York Times. New York Times. May 2, 2018. Retrieved July 5, 2020.
  116. "Britain Is Drowning Itself in Nostalgia". New York Times. New York Times. March 23, 2019. Retrieved July 5, 2020.
  117. "A Fanatical Sect Has Hijacked British Politics". New York Times. New York Times. June 25, 2019. Retrieved July 5, 2020.
  118. "Lockdown? What Lockdown? Heat Wave Brings Britons Out in Droves". New York Times. The New York Times. June 26, 2020. Retrieved July 28, 2020.
  119. "The New York Times's take on Brexit Britain is a tad unfair". The Times. The Times. July 19, 2020. Retrieved July 28, 2020.
  120. 'Homophobic' jokes about Trump and Putin criticised by LGBT campaigners Archived July 22, 2018, at the Wayback Machine. BBC News. July 17, 2018.
  121. "New York Times under fire for 'homophobic' cartoon of Trump and Putin". Reuters. July 18, 2018. Archived from the original on July 18, 2018. Retrieved July 21, 2018.
  122. Sheehan, Matt (March 3, 2014). "Chinese Netizens Lash Out At U.S. For Downplaying Severity Of Deadly Knife Attack". The Huffington Post. Archived from the original on February 11, 2017.
  123. West, James (November 4, 2015). "Sorry, New York Times: Your Big China Story is "Old News."". Mother Jones. Archived from the original on July 19, 2018.
  124. "Sarah Jeong Joins The Times's Editorial Board". New York Times Company. August 1, 2018. Archived from the original on August 1, 2018. Retrieved August 2, 2018.
  125. "NY Times stands by new hire Sarah Jeong over Twitter furor". Associated Press. August 2, 2018. Archived from the original on August 11, 2018. Retrieved August 11, 2018.
  126. "NY Times stands by 'racist tweets' reporter". BBC News. August 2, 2018. Archived from the original on August 12, 2018. Retrieved August 11, 2018.
  127. "Reporting on The Times: How the paper of record ignored the Holocaust". Aeon Video (YouTube).
  128. Downplaying the Holocaust -- Sulzberger & NY Times: Anna Blech at TEDxHunterCCS TEDx Talks, 2013
  129. Rothbaum, Noah (November 12, 2020). "The New Rules For Holiday Eating & Drinking in 2020". The Daily Beast. Retrieved November 13, 2020.
  130. Frantzman, Seth J. (April 27, 2019). "New York Times internationally prints antisemitic cartoon of Trump, Netanyahu". The Jerusalem Post. Archived from the original on April 27, 2019. Retrieved April 27, 2019.
  131. Garcia, Victor (April 29, 2019). "New York Times slammed for another Netanyahu cartoon days after 'anti-Semitic' sketch". Fox News. Archived from the original on April 29, 2019. Retrieved April 29, 2019.
  132. Homan, Timothy R. (August 22, 2019). "New York Times editor deletes and apologizes for past 'offensive' tweets". TheHill. Archived from the original on August 25, 2019. Retrieved August 25, 2019.
  133. "'NY Times' editor apologizes for 'Crappy Jew Year' tweet made decade ago". The Jerusalem Post | JPost.com. Archived from the original on May 7, 2020. Retrieved May 31, 2020.
  134. "Russia Slams NYT for 'Russophobia' Following Pulitzer Prize Win". The Moscow Times. May 5, 2020.
  135. Stoll, Ira (January 20, 2021). "Frequent New York Times Opinion Writer Was Secret Iranian Agent, Federal Prosecutors Charge". Algemeiner Journal. Retrieved February 2, 2021.
This article is issued from Wikipedia. The text is licensed under Creative Commons - Attribution - Sharealike. Additional terms may apply for the media files.