http://www.alternet.org/mediaculture/48828/On the Big Issues, the NY Times Flips the Bird to Normal Americans
By David Sirota, HuffingtonPost.com. Posted March 5, 2007.
From calling opposition to the Iraq war a 'fringe' position, to endorsing sham environmentalism, to defending the low taxation of billionaires, The New York Times and the political establishment aren't in sync with the majority of Americans.
The New York Times and New York's political class are often attacked as bastions of wealthy, out-of-touch elites whose world view is completely divorced from that of most middle-class Americans. This is not a fair characterization -- but every now and again it's obvious why the characterization has come to be part of the political lexicon. Check out these three examples from just the last week to see what I mean.
Example 1: NYT Says Being Against the War Is "Fringe"
The first example comes from the Times' piece today about congressional Democrats' anti-war Out of Iraq Caucus, the New York Times is so blinded by its elitist, Serious Person disdain for the vast majority of the public that it actually published this absurdly oxymoronic statement:
"Even with a majority of Americans opposing the war, the caucus is struggling to overcome its fringe image."
I say this statement is oxymoronic because Democrats who want to bring the troops home from Iraq do not have a "fringe image" among the public, which also -- according to polls -- strongly wants the same thing. Then again, maybe I'm wrong: Maybe this statement is just a very public admission that editors and reporters at newspapers like The New York Times really believe they get to unilaterally decide "images," not the public; and from their Beltway vantage point where the only Serious People are those neoconservatives who pushed the war in the first place, anyone who wants to end the war is a Dirty Hippie on the "fringe." Either way, this line is stunning (though sadly not shocking) for its sheer idiocy, its Beltway-typical disconnection from public opinion, its deliberate contempt for the majority of the country -- or whatever combination of all three led to its publication.
more...