(Headline USA) The publisher of the New York Times admitted this week that the White House has been “extremely upset” with the publication’s coverage of President Joe Biden’s age and poor approval ratings.
Biden’s team has reportedly sparred with the Times on multiple occasions in recent months. In January, for example, a meeting between Times editors and Biden’s reelection campaign reportedly “did not go well” after Biden’s allies began criticizing their coverage of the president.
Semafor claimed the Biden campaign “invoked a spreadsheet laying out areas where the team believes their reporting has fallen short,” and used the meeting as an “opportunity to tell them what they’re getting wrong.”
Biden’s officials were also reportedly frustrated with the outlet’s “coverage of former President Donald Trump,” arguing that the media had been “too focused on his legal troubles and haven’t paid enough attention to some of his incendiary recent statements on the campaign trail.”
White House officials weren’t the only ones delusional about the Grey Lady’s warped coverage, however.
In a conversation with the Reuters Institute for the Study of Journalism on Monday, Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger sought to assuage concerns that the left-leaning paper was biased in its coverage toward Trump by claiming that the Times had been equally critical of Biden.
“We are going to continue to report fully and fairly, not just on Donald Trump but also on President Joe Biden” Sulzberger said, falsely claiming that the paper reported fairly on Trump.
Ample evidence has shown the Times colluded with intelligence officials to push bogus narratives about Trump, including the Russia hoax, and that it has oftentimes been openly hostile and needlessly adversarial toward him.
Sulzberger himself has reportedly admitted in private conversations to embracing an anti-Republican double-standard in the paper’s coverage.
Biden, meanwhile, “is a historically unpopular incumbent and the oldest man to ever hold this office,” Sulzberger conceded.
“We’ve reported on both of those realities extensively, and the White House has been extremely upset about it,” he said.
Despite Sulzberger’s claim, the Times has only recently hopped on board the Biden-bashing bandwagon, with its criticism becoming something of a newsworthy event in and of itself.
The precipitating event appears to have been the release of a damning special-counsel report by Robert Hur which suggested the 81-year-old president’s onset of dementia was more severe than previously reported.
The report presented something of a catch-22, offering Biden’s senility as the primary justification for avoiding criminal charges in his mishandling of classified documents.
Sulzberger insisted that concerns about Biden’s age were not “even” with Trump’s legal battles, all of which have muscled their way through the justice system on the flimsiest of merit using outlandish legal theories and rationalizations stretched to maximum capacity.
“They are different. But they are both true, and the public needs to know both those things,” Sulzberger magnanimously proffered. “And if you are hyping up one side or downplaying the other, no side has a reason to trust you in the long run.”
