Political Bias? Wall Street Journal Editor Fires Back At New York Times

by Joe Coscarelli | 12:48 pm, December 14th, 2009

» 9 comments

img-cs---the-new-york-times_162152736088 In this morning’s New York Times, media columnist David Carr showed his hand early in a column about the two-year anniversary of Rupert Murdoch‘s purchase of the Wall Street Journal, writing in his opening paragraph that he counted himself among the “chorus of journalism church ladies” who “warned that one of the crown jewels of American journalism now resided in the hands of a roughneck.” Carr goes on to say that the paper has experienced “pro-business, antigovernment shift” and developed a conservative bias. Now, the Wall Street Journal‘s editor-in-chief Robert Thomson is firing back in a statement, as reported by John Koblin in The Observer.

“The news column by a Mr. David Carr today is yet more evidence that The New York Times is uncomfortable about the rise of an increasingly successful rival while its own circulation and credibility are in retreat,” Thomson’s statement begins, going on to say that, “principle is but a bystander at .”

Koblin reached out to both Carr and Times editor Bill Keller for a response to the response, with Carr writing back, “No, seems fair to have him have his say. I had mine and stand by it.”

The full text of Thomson’s comment is below:

The news column by a Mr David Carr today is yet more evidence that The New York Times is uncomfortable about the rise of an increasingly successful rival while its own circulation and credibility are in retreat. The usual practice of quoting ex-employees was supplemented by a succession of anonymous quotes and unsubstantiated assertions. The attack follows the extraordinary actions of Mr Bill Keller, the Executive Editor, who, among other things, last year wrote personally and at length to a prize committee casting aspersions on Journal journalists and journalism. Whether it be in the quest for prizes or in the disparagement of competitors, principle is but a bystander at The New York Times.

In his rebuttal, Keller said, “The column was scrupulously fair and, if anything, understated…” Read the rest here.

Under Murdoch, Tilting Rightward at The Journal [New York Times]
Robert Thomson Takes Swing at David Carr, Bill Keller [The Observer]

J Baustian

I’ve been a subscriber to the WSJ since the late 1970s and continue to be very satisfied with its coverage of news and opinion.

In the 1970s and early 1980s I was an occasional reader of the New York Times, but that was a long time ago. Its editors have no grounds for complaining about the editorial standards at the WSJ. The Times has turned into a contemptible paper and there will be no tears from me on the day it ceases publication.
TfT

Pinch and Keller have destroyed the NYTimes. There was a day the paper was respected, but that is long gone. I too look forward to the day the times ceases publication. The double standard, its use of “anonymous sources”, the publication of TS code word info on its front pages, and it’s lack of honest reporting on climategate have further diminished the NYTimes to bird cage liner. GIGO.
m

Dear god no, please don’t give America another Murdoch-style ragsheet. I wonder when WSJ will decide to put naked women on page 3.
http://www.nukethefridge.com MartiniShark

The Climate-gate issue tells it all. At The Times they said they would not publish the released email because they were never intended for public exposure. When it came to Sarah Palin’s personal emails however — they had zero problem linking to those.

The best comparison however comes in the dishonesty regarding financial matters on a nationwide scale. WSJ has always been straightforward with economic numbers, regardless who is in office, NYT not so much. Note how Bush had a dismal economy, according to the Times, back when unemployment was at the 4% level, and now we are told there are rosy signs when unemployment rises at a slower pace than expected, ignoring the 10% figure that continues to climb.
germ

The farther the Times pushes to the left, the more the center is going to seem “far right.”
m

In every other country in the world Obama is a conservative. Only in America he’s called a socialist by the right-wingers. This says a lot about how extremely, extremely, hyper-far right the American right wing is.
ImNotBlue

m says:
December 14, 2009 at 4:17 pm

In every other country in the world Obama is a conservative.

1) Who cares.
2) No he’s not.
3) And?
http://www.nukethefridge.com MartiniShark

@ m

Fealty to other nations may be your thing but comparing us to every other socialized government does not win you the argument. When we have a government that effectively owns private entities, has the power to fire CEOs, and install retro-active taxes against contracted salaries as a PR move it is not only in America that such actions are called socialist.
m

Those things are done by conservative governments around the world. France is ruled by a majority of conservatives. Sarkozy is a conservative. He’s done basically the same thing.

Congratulations, you just discovered you’re a super far-right winger.