For many years, I read the New York Times, the Washington Post and the Los Angeles Times. I did not read these “newspapers” because I thought I would learn something. That was unlikely at best. Actually, I read these liberal and editorial publications to see what others were reading. Eventually, my curiosity was overwhelmed by the realization that such reading was an unpleasant waste of my time.
Every now and then I find someone who finds some benefit in reading these publications and seems not to see liberal slant and still believes that the publications are bastions of straight news coverage. Well, it is hard to let that characterization stand.
Evidence of the left leaning nature of the NYT is often expressed best by their failure to cover stories that do not support the liberal programs they support. For example, the NYT strongly supported the passage of ObamaCare. This clearly was the program for the masses. When the Obama Administration provided over 2000 waivers to its largest campaign contributors, it seemed to many that perhaps the bloom may have come off the program. No so to the NYT which barely mentioned the waivers. From time-to-time my friend Tom Berner will provide additional examples of the leftist nature of the Times. For my part, I have seen the clearest example of all.
With all that we have seen which evidences the true colors of the NYT, perhaps the most obvious evidence that the NYT has a policy to trash conservative views can be found in the Best Sellers List. For many years readers and non-readers alike assumed that the Best Sellers list was based solely on which books were selling well. Certainly, people would not be interested in the list were it merely developed at the whim of some NYT staffer. It would seem that even this sacrosanct area of non-political reporting has been subverted. How in the world could they accomplish this? Well actually, it was fairly easy. What they did was remove conservative books from the Hardcover Non-Fiction List. They did not remove such books from the Best Sellers list altogether. Rather, they moved such books to the Advice, How-To and Miscellaneous List. Imagine that! If I were looking for Dick Morris, I would not search the “how to bake a cake” section. It is clear that this policy was not developed inadvertently and was not develop below top management. This makes it all the more telling. One might ask why it makes any difference. Why is it so insidious? It is only the Best Seller list. So what? Consider this. I was transferring planes recently and walked by the book store in the terminal. I knew Dick Morris had a new book out. So did Mike Huckabee. Michelle Malkin and Ann Coulter both had recent books on the shelves. I had a few minutes, so I thought I would check them out. When I checked in on the Best Seller table, none of the books was to be found. When I checked with the salesperson, she took me to the back of the store near the cook books and there were all of the books I was looking for. Then I realized the reason for the policy change at the NYT. They knew that all of the book sellers would present books in their store according to the classification by the NYT. Now, it seemed that their insidious policy was very important. It had a substantial impact of the availability of conservative books to the people. The NYT has finally showed their liberal editorial policy, lest there was ever any doubt
