Standup Comedy At The New York Times

Stand up Comedy At The New York Times

by

R. E. Prindle

 

Whether intentional or not the times has published the funniest sketch ever entitled:  Inquiry Focuses On Publisher’s Support For Trump.  It seems it is or should be illegal for any newspaper, and I might add the National Enquirer has never before been called a newspaper, to support our Pres.

Federal authorities examining the work President Trump’s former lawyer did to squelch embarrassing stories before the 2016 election have come to believe that an important ally in the effort, the tabloid company American Media, Inc. (National Enquirer) at times acted more as a political supporter than as a news organization, according to people briefed on the investigation.

I hope that they aren’t going to waste a lot of our money over this.  I read the paper and I have to state unequivocally that the National Enquirer was the only publication (the NE is more of a magazine than a newspaper) that had a good word for the future Pres.

The smear pieces that filled the pages of the Times, Vanity Fair, The New Yorker, New York Mag, Harper’s, Atlantic and every other publication without exception, did I forget to mention Rolling Stone, was unconscionable.  It was pure anti-Trump propaganda.  ‘You cannot elect this man.’  they all screamed.  The Times itself shilled for Hillary while shamelessly violating all journalistic standards to publish pure propaganda, fake news, against Trump.

It could also spell trouble for the company which publishes The National Enquirer, raising thorny questions about when coverage that is favorable to a candidate strays into overt political activity and when First Amendment protections should apply.

 

If that isn’t the height of hypocrisy I don’t know what is.  This hit comedy piece was written by two guys with obvious noms de plume, Jim Rutenberg and Ben Profess, apparently the subject was too tough for just one writer, who apparently learned nothing about the history of journalism at Harvard.  I don’t know whether the duo went to Harvard but their writing is on the level of what Harvard has become.  Had they learned their history they would be aware that publishers have always influenced elections by endorsing one candidate over another.  In other words they explicitly said vote for Brown because we don’t like Blonde.

The Times, then, is imploring Congress to investigate whether Hillary’s First Amendment rights were violated when the National Enquirer endorsed Trump.  Doesn’t the Times know that the NE has been sued so many times that in self-protection each story is closely fact checked and that includes anything about Trump?   Who is calling the shots at the Times?  Not Rutenberg or Profess, they’re contract writers doing what they’re told.

Nor was the story confined to the back pages where any apologies go but is in the exact center of the front page of the 7/22/18 Sunday edition.  Sunday, the day the paper gets maximum exposure.  I wouldn’t have seen it otherwise and when I did I fell out of my chair laughing, spilled coffee all over myself.

The Times is spilling its reputation all over the place.