In a nifty sleight of hand, powerful New York Times‘ columnist, Maureen Dowd penned a column last weekend insisting that VP Joe Biden’s son pushed his father to make a third and final run for the Presidency, opposing Hillary Clinton for the Democratic nomination. Times’ political reporter Amy Chozick then quoted Dowd as a “news source” on this juicy scoop. What is lost here is the tastelessness of Dowd using the tragedy of Beau Biden’s untimely death as both an excuse to insult Hillary while, not coincidentally, distracting the public and thus rescuing her employer from the enormous damage done to its reputation via its false story about Hillary Clinton the week prior. As author and commentator Anita Finlay noted, “It was the journalistic equivalent of ‘Look over there, squirrel!’ It’s unlikely that the Vice President will run but — mission accomplished. We’re on to the next crisis and The New York Times escapes accountability.”
Political strategist and author Shawna Vercher noted “This is a huge error and it’s not the first time. This story was left hanging out there while other major news outlets ran with it, doing damage. But its also a financial decision. Negative and salacious stories sell. The New York Times was laughing all the way to the bank. But this isn’t going away. People were calling to cancel their subscriptions over this.”
Shawna further stated that ultimately whoever reports thoughtfully, intelligently and truthfully will win the day. Anita countered that it will take grassroots to hold them accountable. What do you say? Will distractions win — or did The New York Times finally go too far?
Don’t miss our take on Dare We Say, and give us yours.
