The New York Times has developed a twofold relationship with the Democratic Party. The broadsheet’s primary role is spreading propaganda, a duty the paper embraces with gusto on both its news and opinion pages by amplifying far-left talking points and denouncing anyone who disagrees, including resistant Dems. 

Its other role is helping to set the party’s platform by seizing on social and cultural developments and shaping them into a political agenda. The 1619 Project is the ultimate example, with the error-ridden lead essay (which won a Pulitzer Prize!) being a template for indoctrinating school children with critical race theory and other anti-white dogma. 

Comes now another example of the paper’s agenda-setting role, and this one has the potential to be immediately consequential. The Gray Lady finally is admitting that the nation’s crime wave is out of control and must be confronted. 

Dubious change of tune 

Under the headline “Democrats Are Feeling The Pressure On Crime From Their Own Base,” a Saturday article finds the focus on what it calls “police reform” is giving way to the plague of violence and that the biggest push for change is coming “largely from people of color.” 

Citing Dem campaigns in Baltimore, Atlanta, San Francisco and Seattle, reporter Alexander Burns concludes that the motivation is not just Republican attacks but rather the “mounting outcry from Black, Hispanic and Asian-American communities.” 

Police at the scene where two people were shot - one in critical condition - at 350 W37th Street in New York, NY around 12:15 a.m. on May 5, 2022. (Photo/Christopher Sadowski)
The scene where multiple people were shot in NYC last month amid an uptick in crime.
Christopher Sadowski

Burns adds that these groups are “bearing the brunt of a national crime wave” and notes most of the candidates making the push for more policing are nonwhite. 

Repeated references to the race of those involved are not incidental, as they reflect a litmus test. If only white voters or white candidates were demanding change, there wouldn’t be a story, at least a sympathetic one. But with nonwhites wanting it, the Times is on board and effectively granting permission for Dems to adopt an anti-crime platform for the fall midterms. 

There is no moral imperative or great awakening to the paper’s flip-flop, only a partisan fervor to beat Republicans. Compassion for crime victims doesn’t seem to have played a role. 

And this being the Times, there is no admission of error about its past role. Consider that in January of this year, in a “newsletter” that ran online, the paper noted that murder rates had risen nearly 30% in 2020 over 2019, a jump of nearly 5,000 victims. The missive, without irony, lamented the lack of “national attention” and citing unspecified research, said that was because “White and affluent Americans have been less directly affected by the murder spike, but they’re also more likely to influence what news outlets cover and what politicians talk about.” 

The piece then added: “The violence remains a grave example of racial inequality in the US.” 

Trying to unpack the double-talk and hypocrisy in that sequence can cause whiplash. 

This is, after all, the same newspaper that helped lead the mainstream media and Dems down the road to perdition and thus shares responsibility for the bloody carnage among nonwhite victims and the lack of attention they got. 

The Times’ long-held, anti-police bias was key to its soft coverage of the violence associated with George Floyd protests in 2020. From front page to last, it supported the rioters’ demand for racial justice, scorned Donald Trump’s embrace of law enforcement and cheered claims from Joe Biden and other Dems that police were guilty of “systemic racism.” 

Op-ed embarrassment 

Tom Cotton
Sen. Tom Cotton wrote an op-ed two years ago calling for Trump to bring in the military in response to riots and unrest.
Tom Brenner/Getty Images

Indeed, it was two years ago last Friday that the paper published Sen. Tom Cotton’s op-ed calling for Trump to send in the military to quell the riots and restore order. The blowback from the Times staff was instantaneous as newsroom employees rebelled and labeled the piece “fascistic” and “racist.” 

They demanded and got the resignation of James Bennet, the top opinion editor. Publisher A.G. Sulzberger, after first supporting publication, backed down and recanted. 

The Times later attached a bizarre Editors’ Note to the Cotton piece that cites reasons why it shouldn’t have been published. The note is an embarrassing farrago of craven claims that try to justify surrender to a mob of entitled snowflakes who show zero understanding of the point of an op-ed page. 

Meanwhile, the police-are-bad theme is also reflected in what the paper doesn’t cover. If the Times is your only source of news, you would have no idea about the vast scope of nationwide violence that continues to this day. 

Instead, the paper anguishes over the victims only when the perpetrator fits its preferred narrative of rampant white supremacy or the need for gun control. The narrative broke down when an anti-Semitic, black nationalist drove his car through a Christmas parade in Waukesha, Wis., killing six people and injuring 62 others, so the paper gave it short shrift. 

Protesters gather outside of the Barclay's Center in Brooklyn to protest the death of George Floyd in 2020.
Protesters gather outside of the Barclay’s Center in Brooklyn to protest the death of George Floyd in 2020.
Michael Nigro/Sipa USA via AP

The Times continued to parrot far-left talking points about police racism even as crime engulfed its headquarters on Manhattan’s West Side. Nor did it change its tune when company officials beefed up the security staff and hired armed, off-duty cops to protect employees. 

As with pretty much all its coverage, race is the fulcrum. The paper for years magnified the radical argument that the largely white New York Police Department amounted to an occupying army in nonwhite neighborhoods. 

Never mind that upwards of 90% of crime victims were nonwhite. It took a willful blindness for the paper not to see that the historic drops in violence under Mayors Rudy Giuliani and Michael Bloomberg benefitted those communities most and saved the lives of thousands of black and Latino New Yorkers. 

Even as the NYPD became majority nonwhite, the Times never found much to like. When crime rates began to climb again as Mayor Bill de Blasio handcuffed the cops and the city’s district attorneys decided to be social workers instead of prosecutors, the Times kept hammering the police and ignored the victims of crime. 

And when black former cop Eric Adams was the only Democrat in last year’s mayoral primary who made tackling crime his top agenda, the Times endorsed two of his rivals. 

But that was then, and this is now. With violence and mayhem still spinning out of control across America, nonwhites demanding public safety and a major election approaching, the rules suddenly are changed. 

Mayor Eric Adams speaks at an anti-gun violence rally on the steps of City Hall June 2.
Mayor Eric Adams speaks at an anti-gun violence rally on the steps of City Hall June 2.
William Farrington

Because the Times is giving the greenlight, watch for Dems everywhere to seize on crime as Public Enemy No. 1. 

Wide a-woke & still dreaming

Reader Marion Friedman sees the irony of language, writing: “The people most asleep at the switch are those who identify as ‘woke.’ How can we, who are awake to all that is so dysfunctional, wake up the ‘woke’”? 


Now headed for World War Fore!

Headline No. 1: New poll shows 44 percent of Americans say the nation is headed toward civil war 

Headline No. 2: Florida man, 77, punches friend, 84, over golf etiquette 

Looks like the war already started.

Read More