BREAKING: The NYT admits that they were 100% incorrect about the Patriots vist to the White house. Liberals PWNED again!!
- Russian hacker
- Posted 04/21/2017 08:38 AM - Hide
- Did The New York Times just admit wrongdoing? Why yes, yes indeed, the newspaper, through its sports editor, sent an email to The Washington Post taking responsibility for a recent tweet that appeared to show how much the New England Patriots hated President Donald Trump in comparison to Barack Obama - only the tweet was highly inaccurate.
This is big news, folks. It's not an apology. But it's a start.
It's not often The New York Times, one of the leftist-leaningest newspapers in the country, admits, however indirectly, its hunger to paint Trump as a demon may have gotten the best of it this time.
The backstory, if you've not heard, is this: The New England Patriots, Super Bowl winners, were invited to the White House to meet Trump - standard Super Bowl winning fare. So they did. Then The New York Times took a photo of the meet-and-greet and blasted it out on Twitter as proof positive of how Patriots' players like Obama more than Trump. Why? The tweet contained a photo from 2015, when the Patriots also won the Super Bowl, showing players and club members gathered on the steps of the White House - with Obama - alongside a photo of this recent Patriots' gathering with Trump. And the crowd size for Trump was smaller than the crowd size for Obama.
NYT Sports tweeted: "Patriots' turnout for President Obama in 2015 vs. Patriots' turnout for President Trump today."
Only thing is: That conclusion wasn't correct.
The New England Patriots said as much, in their own tweet about the photos: "These photos lack context. Facts: In 2015, over 40 football staff were on the stairs. In 2017, they were seated on the South Lawn."
And Trump, of course, called out the newspaper for its bias in his own tweet.
"Failing @nytimes, which has been calling me wrong for two years, just got caught in a big lie concerning New England Patriots visit to W.H.," he wrote.
Yes they did.
So what did The New York Times do?
Sports Editor Jason Stallman stepped forward and took the fall for the tweets.
He said in an email to the Washington Post: "Bad tweet by me. Terrible tweet. I wish I could say it's complicated, but no, this one is pretty straightforward: I'm an idiot. It was my idea, it was my execution, it was my blunder. I made a decision in about four minutes that clearly warranted much more time. Once we learned more, we tried to fix everything as much as possible, as swiftly as possible and as transparently as possible. Of course, at that point the damage was done. I just needed to own it."
Sadly, the damage has indeed been done.
Brownie points for Stallman for coming meekly through with his admission. But one can only wonder: Doesn't this happen a bit too often at mainstream media outlets in the first place?
After all, Trump did win the White House - despite every media outlet in America, it seemed, gunning for his downfall, and about every poll in America touting his certain loss. The New York Times was forced to come out, post-election, and send a letter to readers promising more balanced coverage, semi-apologizing for the biased, skewed and ultimately, inaccurate coverage of the Trump campaign. So Stallman's a good baby step. But The New York Times, as a whole, has a long, long way to go to shed the obvious pro-left bias. Next time, for instance, try an actual apology along with the admission of guilt.