New York Times Responds To Reverend Jeremiah Wright's Year-Old Letter About Paper's "Misrepresentations"

Time :

"I see that you have posted Rev. Wright's letter of a year ago to Jodi Kantor of The New York Times.

At The Times, we generally choose to let our work speak for itself. But in this case, I'd like to add some facts to ensure that Mr. Wright's complaints are placed in their proper context and that the dissemination of his letter now does not unfairly impugn Ms. Kantor's work or undermine public confidence in our standards and practices.

Read the whole story: Time

Comments

[brooklyncitizen]

This is more evidence of how the NY Times is a propaganda voice for the Bush Administration and for their Neo-Con lite candidate Hillary.

Great story in the New Yorker about (of all things) why/how newspapers are going out of pirint and Arianna is featured as a counter voice to print media....v­ery interesting .The writer however just grazes the truth as to why so many of us have abandonned the print media for alternative news sources.

Many of the reasons are highlighted in this thread and by the NY Times business as usual type of reporting. Frankly, Rev. Wright summarizes the NYT misdeeds and this is why commercial media has become irrelevant. This paper along with the Washington Post and others have for several administrations given us a faulty and biased view of our world , our govt and our affairs. They deserve to be put out of business.

http://www.newyorker.com/reporting/2008/03/31/080331fa_fact_alterman

God bless the internet.

[Freedomscap]

Some if not many of the comments are provocativ­e/stimulat­ing and interesting/ thought provoking. Others merely misconstrue the meaning of words. Many people can't discern the difference between racism, prejudice and a stereotype. If someone say something about whites: they conclude that they are racist. If someone says something about jews or Israel: they are anti-Semites.

Heck, all the time, just on television, all these pundits/cr­itics/anal­yst are telling us what black folks are like, and they aren't even black, yet they know, somehow! Crazy!!!

[AlphaDoc]

And these same pundits/cr­itics/anal­ysts have no problem at all in stereotyping white working-class people, the elderly, college students, etc, telling us all how every comment on every issue will affect them and how they are likely to vote because of it. Why doesn't anyone call out the commentators for saying that white people are offended by Reverend Wright's remarks (I'm white and not at all offended), or that older women will vote for Hillary? (I'm an older woman and I support Obama.) Stereotyping is okay if it's done in the newsroom, but not okay if it's done in a church?

[timothe]

And herein lies the problem with political correctness. So glad you guys finally figured it out. (10 years too late)

Once you start censoring speech, even hate speech, its next to impossible to draw the line where political correctness stops and descriptive analysis starts.

The purpose of political correctness was to stop using language to incite hate...as if somehow that would stop the hate. It doesn't.

If we're going to have an open and honest discussion about race, religion, nationality, and gender, then we have to address the stereotypes head on. Censoring the offenders does nothing to solve the problem.

[KOisGod]

Good. Wring every last pathetic drop of juice from the story. Pretty soon, it will be a dried up husk, throw aside and turning to dust. By election time, when hillary is crying her bitter tears over being a LOSER, and senile McBomb is talking another 100 years of war, there will be nothing left to reveal about Obama, and for once, this nation will elect a man of substance, integrity and honor.

[HumeSkeptic]

The more I learn about thhis Reeverend Wright, the more I like him. So waht if he said a few things that are not quite accurate. We all do that, especially pastors. For God's sake, isn't just saying that Dod exists is an unsubstantiated claim? And all pastors do that.

Lighten up folks. Generally speaking, what Wright says is the truth.

[Freedomscap]

Exactly -- unintended consequences.

[Amminadab]

So you believe the CIA created AIDS to unleash upon Africa?

[HermioneGranger]

I wouldn't rule it out. There target, however, might have been someone else. Remember Edgewood?

[couch2000]

Well here is whats wrong with it, everyone says you got to put it in context, well they wouldnt let Trent Lott put his words in context, they wouldnt let Dog the Bounty Hunter put his words in context, noway, well thats whats wrong with it, its ok for blacks to screw whites but no white is allowed to say a word no way, thats whats a wrong with it

[qdog112]

PATHETIC and symbolic of MSM ineptitude, kowtowing and bias.

[ME08]

Looks like Rev.Wright stepped in a big pile of his own making...b­etter he confine himself to help stopping AIDS among African Americans rather than coming up with lunatic reasons why they started getting it...from the Times response to loudmouth Rev. Wrong:

Putting aside the question of why a letter that is more than a year old is suddenly getting new circulation, it is worth noting that at no time has Mr. Wright challenged the accuracy of either story written by Ms. Kantor – both of which, given the events of the last several weeks, seem remarkably prescient about the potential political peril in the Obama-Wright relationship.

The key is Wrong has no leg to stand on, as do any of the countless apologists for him.

[Freedomscap]

Did white doctors intentionally infect blacks with syphillis?

[nogimmicks]

Why even bother to write to the New York Times, the voice of Bill-the-s­miling-mur­derer-Kris­tol? This is exactly what NYT wants, i.e. some action to keep the anti-Obama news alive.

[Seattlelite]

Okay were exactly is the story here? Just another chance to invoke Wright's name keep the negativity stirring. The media has gone beyond shameless trying to stir up crap over this man. The media has done no coverage on the other thousands of other speeches by this man when he talks about unity, kindness and forgiveness -- nor have they covered the community work and services offered to the poor by this church. All about the ratings trash sells news does not.

[LorettaSingbiel]

AMEN TO THAT!

OBAMA '08!
HOPE & CHANGE!

Stay safe, healthy and happy,
Love, Loretta

[kravitz]

So the hit pieces are truly hit pieces. Even if delivered by surrogate media.

It almost sounds like The Times actually wants to negatively impact Obama's candicacy by the end of that last sentence..­.

"the potential political peril in the Obama-Wright relationsh­ip.”

The response sounds like proof enough to me that it's just what the paper wants after all...

[Freedomscap]

Exactly right!

[Dyogenes]

If the Times were truly interested in the religious angle of presidential candidates, they would send Jodi to interview the hate-filled, Catholic-bashing evangelical kingpin, Rev. Hagee who McCain embraced just a few month ago when Hagee publicly endorsed McCain. Is there a YouTube loop of Hagee spilling his vile hate-speech about Muslims as well as Catholics?
Also, what about a story about McCain's switch from life-long Episcopal to Baptist a few years ago--when politics crosses McCain's religious road, is it not news?

[loocifer]

None of the above was a the personal spirtual advisor and pastor to a presidential nominee the way that the racist wright was.

[Freedomscap]

How do you know Rev. Wright is racist -- give me the exact/specific comment that makes you think he is a racist?

[galateadoro]

More BS and smokescreen from the NYT, as expected. They don't address Wright's complaints, but concentrate on the timing of their release in the media, as if it mattered.

What does matter is the reason the NYT itself didn't publish his letter a year ago.

[MakeChessNotWar]

In High School I took a class in propaganda. We studied Pravda and the NY Times. Quantity of propaganda was about even. They are very manipulative, especially with photos.

[justwaitandsee]

NYT is worried that their status is hitting Tabloid Level!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Iraq WAR Propaganda that was funnel through their newspaper
The Outing of a CIA Agent
The Distortion and Misrepresentation of Senator Obama
The Distortion and Misrepresentation of Senator McCain
Your Bias Blog says it all

It seems The Clintons and the NYT have a lot in common

[Jason357]

Why is it that anyone who doesn't act submissive to authority is automatically a danger, according to US politicians? Rev. Wright was NOT calling for condemnation of the US. He was giving a sermon on how America will pay dearly if the government keeps attacking, or sponsoring the attack, of innocent men, women and children.

Economic sanctions are attempts to starve a populace into a desperate overthrow of their government. Nice, huh?

[CelticMajic]

" Rev. Wright was NOT calling for condemnation of the US."

So, what do you call "G.. D... Amereica (repeat, repeat, repeat) if not co0ndemation?

[research]

End America's GodDamn Iraq War Crime!

That's what.

[S1m0n]

"Not God Bless America. God Damn America! That’s in the Bible. For killing innocent people. God Damn America for treating us citizens as less than human. God Damn America as long as she tries to act like she is God and she is Supreme."

Read it! It's a condemnation of the sins of killing innocent people, treating some citizens as less than human, and acting like God--all acts, according to Wright, which America has committed.

I dunno what church you go to, but condemning sin is what preachers are expected to do in sermons. Nations can sin as much as individuals, and it does as little good to confess another nations sins as it does an individual to confess another person's sin. Every nation has to confess its own. No one ever got saved by confessing his neighbour's sin.

So, the subject of America's sins is an entirely fit topic for an american church worshipping in America.

[abot]

CelticMajic

Have you even seen the sermon in full context? or Can I assume that all you are going to do is focus on the words GD america. Well let me tell you something this country is not perfect. There are times when I say GD america. This country sucks etc etc. Does that make me unpatriotic - no it does not. It means that I can objectively criticize my country. You have to take the good with the bad. Sometimes I say GB America (sometimes this country does good) and sometimes I don't. If you are going to go through life with blinders on wearing rose covered glasses and cover your ears ( la la la la la la) when anytime something is bad then I feel sorry for you. Does Wright constantly go around saying GD america or tell folks in the church to burn the flag or go kill whitey I doubt he does. Perhaps he could have said something else besides GD america to get the point of his sermon across but I am not going to lynch him instantly for that.

[iswearington]

so what you are trying to say...is that while the native americans were being marched to death on the trail of tears...th­ey were supposed to be singing..g­od bless america.wh­ile black school children were being bitten by police dogs and their skin was being peeled off by bull connors fire hoses they too should have been singing god bless america,and it would follow by your sick racist reasoning.­..that while the jews were being gassed and burned in ovens...th­ey should have marched into the gas chambers singing god bless germany...­.and when the prisoners were on the bataan death march...th­ey should have been singing...­god bless japan. to require african americans who have been devoured by the black holecaust.­...then ground to bits by jimcrow and who now are suffering the through ausrottung of unrelenting institutional racism...t­o sing god bless america...­is a crime against the whole of humanity.it is like being ladled out of the smoking hot grease...a­nd dropped into the boiling water. the meat is falling off our bones.only the depraved wicked human animal would have the chutzpu...­to require its victims to sing hyms of praise while they are being flayed alive.emma­nuel swedenborg wrote that when the wicked human spirit is released from its mortal body...fre­e from the restraints if harm..arre­st...reven­ge ...judgeme­nt or criticism.­..that there are no words to describe its horrible unrelenting wickedness.

[research]

So many uninformed comments. Know what you are talking about:

Wrights speech is good.

http://faultlineusa.blogspot.com/2008/03/jeremiah-wrights-911-sermon-in-context.html

Obama's speech is great:

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/03/18/obama-race-speech-read-t_n_92077.html

Please keep your opinion to yourself if you have not listened to the both speeches.

[Redrover666]

I listened to both, and like most Garlic Nosed, typical whiteys, I'll discuss it, then vote accordingly. Thanks.

[research]

How many THOUSANDS of lies will it take for you to stop trusting BushCo?

You are iether: profiting from BushCo crimes or really really stupid.

[biglover]

What is actually untrue about the italians (romans at the time) crucified Jesus Christ? The truth hurts.

[Freedomscap]

Redrover666: you've already made it clear that you don't know the difference between racism, prejudice and a stereotype. To you, it's all racism.

[RButler]

Obama/Wright '08

[buzz]

I don't recall complaints about "sound bites" when we were discussing presidential hopeful George Allen. Or Imes. Or Ferraro.
Obama supporters are conditioned to think like racists: to see everything, as taught by Obama's Church, from the SOLE PERSPECTIVE of the BLACK COMMUNITY.
If it helps Obama, Obama supporters are for it. If it doesn't, they are against it.
They act like the hateful people with whom Obama surrounds himself: his wife, his pastor.
Thanks to Obama, race relations will be set back. "Typical white people" find his, and his wife's, constant complaining about racism, from the pinnacle of their privileged lives and their own racist views, contradictory and hypocritical.

[danyll]

Buzz, you are grossly ill informed and it shows....j­ust quiet down and get back in your hole.

[RButler]

You illustrate 'buzz's' point well.

[Larry of Corrales]

What are "typical white people?" My experience, as a not so typical Hispanic who is probably whiter than most people who call themselves white is that there is still a lot of discrimination against people of color. People, like yourself, who get upset when African Americans complain about racism, are a good example. I bet you didn't listen to the Obama speech in its entirety did you? If you did listen it was to the Reader's Digest version. What do you know about what they teach in Obama's church except for the two or three videos on "You Tube" or excerpts from those on FOX News. If you haven't attended services there you can't know. If you aren't African American you can't know what life as an African American is like.

[Amminadab]

I listened to Obama's speech. He said we should have a frank discussion about race.

But only Obama is allowed to mention race.

How is this supposed to work?

And how is he supposed to win an election when everyone who questions or criticizes is called a "racist"?

I don't understand the strategy.

[buzz]

"Typical white people" are a fictional group that Obama referred to.
I listened to the entire "sermon" of Wright posted by one of his supporters in an effort to put in "context" his hateful racist remarks. The rest of Wright's tirade, as far as I'm concerned, was even more offensive. The man is a hateful racist.
And, Obama was inspired by him.
I also resent the notion that only blacks are intellectually capable of understanding their own "experience" as a people. That is a racist viewpoint. It claims the intellectual superiority of the black people, and relegates all other groups to inferior status.

[BillForObama]

WHO SHOULD WE BE LISTENING TOO? WHAT HAVE YOU DONE FOR US LATELY (EVER)?

HOW YOU SOUND?

[MHSMustang]

Larry of Corrales asked "What are typical white people?" a few posts earlier. Well, it is hard to say - although I wouldn't devalue the image Obama raised - I would just add it seems they are increasingly thin skinned and easily threatened by people of color. I am a white person who found nothing offensive about Obama's phrase. It was not intended to be denigrating or offensive, so there was no call to be offended. But the "typical white person" of today is apparently greatly pleased to invoke the perceived political correctness of inverting the offense taken by Black Americans when they hear the "typical Black person" used to fill out a description of an individual. Hooray for our side (the side made up of white males feeling endangered by men and women everywhere who are not white that are out to get them), we can invoke political correctness now too when we have no other intellectual ammo to build a case for our point of view!

[kpod]

Wow. Whew.

So much ill-informed, judgemental anger expressed here. "NYT sucks", "Wright is a racist", "Obama's supporters are automatons", etc. etc. Not a thoughtful reply to be seen.

The world of blogging and commenting and anonymous flaming has transformed public debate into poorly written, poorly spelled polemics with questionable grammar.

Yes, the NYT has printed questionable stories and hired some spectacular messes. Yes, the former pastor of Obama's church has said some provocative things. So let's condemn them out of hand, rejecting them and the good in them because they've done some things with which we are uncomfortable.

Feh. I'm ready to unplug my computer. I've already unplugged my tv.

[MHSMustang]

The parallel you draw between the good Reverend and the NYT in your appeal for reason misses the point. To most, if not all of the Reverend's congregation, how he gets his point across, what language he uses, is probably not really offensive. It is only offensive to outsiders looking in who are predisposed to be offended by anything that sounds critical of the white man, and by extension the nation the white man has made of the United States. The Reverend is not really obligated to produce a sermon every week for people who do not attend his church. Obama, a member of the congregation, running for President of the United States is an accident of chance. The Reverend therefore never considers the likelihood that one of his flock might actually amount to something outside the church's community, and likely shouldn't. A bunch of high white minded sermons in that area might ensure he is completely ineffective. By all accounts, the Reverend has worked hard and with notable success at showing younger attendees an alternate path to gangs, drugs and violence against each other and the white establishment. To elect to be offended by sound bytes of his sermons collected out of context and tied together to make him look like a raving, racist madman who hates America is just plain lazy. But it is not a fault you can lay at the feet of Reverend Wright.

[MHSMustang]

The NYT on the other hand has a several centuries old tradition for reporting "all the news that is fit to print." It has been earned by people who took the profession of running a newspaper and being a reporter seriously. They, along with many others, established standards for fact checking and reporting instead of making news. The NYT editorial staff and management have shifted priorities from the enforcement of what must be perceived as quaint standards to making money. And, making news with your paper makes more money than reporting news without the sensational headlines and gruesome personal details.

So, the NYT is free to make a decision to manage a newspaper that is transitioning away from their historical role. Their purposeful disregard of fact checking and investigating of the Administration's run up to the invasion of Iraq, the lack of any kind of leadership in holding their reporters and editors to their old industry standards for accuracy (the sensational story about McCain and his female lobbyist friend lost its value because the innuendo of an improper personal relationship was woven in, and it distracted from the McCain coziness with lobbyists). These aren't accidents or mistakes. They are calculated to get the NYT in the business of making news, because that makes more money. And that is different than the faux offense being taken at the Reverend Wright.