Wednesday, June 14, 2023

The New York Times: journalism or public relations?

 

By Reginald Johnson

 

    Commentary

 

   The last few days I’ve headed over to the news stand (there are still a few left) to pick up a New York Times.

  I don’t normally do this, as I’ve grown increasingly disappointed with the quality of the Times’ reporting, both on the domestic side and the foreign policy side.

  But the Times is still considered the standard bearer for American journalism and in the interest of fairness, I wanted to be absolutely sure that the paper was in fact not covering  --- as critics charge --- one of the biggest potential corruption scandals in recent history.

   That story centers on the allegation made by an FBI informant that President Biden, when he was serving as vice president, and his son Hunter, took a total of $10 million worth of bribes from a Ukrainian businessman to get help from the US government in stopping a criminal investigation of his oil and gas firm.

   This story broke last week after the House Oversight committee, which has been investigating wrongdoing by Hunter Biden, was finally able to get the FBI to release a statement by the informant called  a “1023” which, while partially redacted, indicated that the two Bidens had received payments.

  The story exploded further on Monday when U.S. Sen. Chuck Grassley, a Republican from Iowa, got up on the Senate floor and said that he had received information that the Ukrainian businessman had audiotapes of his discussions with the two Bidens about the bribes.

  “According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses 15 audio recordings of phone calls between him and Hunter Biden,” Grassley said. “According to the 1023, the foreign national possesses two audio recordings of phone calls between him and then Vice President Joe Biden,” said a report on Fox News.

  The allegations obviously are shocking and are widely deserving of coverage. Anytime a President or top official in an administration is implicated in potential bribery that is a huge story.

 Yet, except for conservative outlets like Fox News and Newsmax, the electronic media has ignored the claims. That includes CBS News NBC News, ABC News, CNN and MSNBC.

 On the print side, outlets such as the Wall Street Journal and the New York Post have given the claims strong coverage.

  I wasn’t totally sure whether all the print outlets were ignoring the story, so that’s why I went to check on the Times. Surely, I thought, the Gray Lady, which throughout the decades covered governmental corruption quite well, would give some attention to these new claims, even if they haven’t been verified yet.


                                  

The New York Times building. (Photo, Wikimedia Commons)

 I mean, we’re talking about the President of the United States. What could be more important than that? Bribery is listed as one of the reasons why a President can be impeached, so certainly if a President is implicated in taking illegal payments, it’s paramount that any allegations related to that be checked out by the proper authorities in the government. But they should also be the subject of vigorous inquiry by the press.

 When mayors and governors are implicated in bribery or corruption schemes, that kind of thing is covered avidly by local papers and TV outlets, as it should be.

 Why should a President be any different?

 I must say I was disappointed after my review of the Times. I read three days of the Times, and I found not one reference to the Biden bribery claims.  

   Obviously, the last few days have been dominated by the Trump indictment and all outlets are giving this blanket coverage --- as they should be. This is a massive story --- the first time in US history that a former president has been indicted on federal charges ( he’s already been indicted on state charges in New York) so it deserves a huge amount of coverage. I have no problem with that.

  But the Biden story is big, too. Joe Biden is the current president, not former, and he’s the person who is overseeing the conduct of domestic and foreign policy affecting hundreds of millions of people and public expenditures worth trillions of dollars. If claims about criminality are made against him, that should be the subject of a laser focus by the media, and not just shunted aside.

  The fact that the New York Times --- probably the most widely known media outlet in the world and still one of the most respected --- does not give the story about the Bidens and potential bribery even a mention or a small story in the back pages, is a complete outrage. This is NOT reporting and it is NOT journalism. The Times is shirking its duties as a member of and the leader of the media.

  The press or what is known as the Fourth Estate is supposed to play a critical function in our society. The press traditionally is supposed to act as a “watchdog” against government wrongdoing. Right now, the New York Times and many other media outlets are not acting as that watchdog. Instead, they’re acting more like a guard who’s drunk on duty.

  We don’t know whether the Biden allegations are true. Maybe the informant is not to be trusted. But the point is, this needs to be checked out. The FBI has sat on this story for several years and it took a lot of cajoling and threats of a contempt citation by the House Oversight committee to finally get FBI Director Christopher Ray to release the document prepared by the informant. Then parts of it, apparently those dealing with the audiotapes, were redacted.

  So there’s been some prevarications by the FBI in terms of investigating this issue and that’s also part of the wider story. It’s not just about whether the President and his son took bribes but also whether the agency that is supposed to be ferreting out information about possible criminal misconduct is doing its job. Right now, it doesn’t look like they are.

  The New York Times and much of the rest of the media have to get back on track and report on the basics of news. When officeholders are involved in possible corruption that’s one of those basics and they must report on it. They cannot put something aside simply because somebody is a favored political person and covering that particular person in a negative way might hurt their electoral chances. I hope the Times has not been thinking like this but it kind of looks like they have been.

  If you’re a reporter or journalist with a daily news operation, you MUST cover corruption. If you’re not, you’re not a reporter and you’re not a journalist. It’s really that simple.

  The New York Times has to decide whether they’re still in the news business or whether they’re in public relations. Shame on them if it’s the latter.

 

 

 

 

 

 

No comments:

Post a Comment