In 1860, French tightrope walker Charles Blondin was the first person to cross Niagara Falls on a tightrope than spanned 11,000 feet.
He then pushed a wheelbarrow across the Falls and addressed the massive crowd:
“Do you believe I can carry a person across in this wheelbarrow?”
The crowd enthusiastically yelled, “Yes! You are the greatest tightrope walker in the world. We believe!”
“Okay,” said Blondin, “Who wants to get into the wheelbarrow.”
Despite the crowd telling Blondin they had full faith in his abilities, no one volunteered to get in the wheelbarrow.
That lack of faith is how many journalists feel after the New York Times, long known as the “Grey Lady” and the winner of more Pullitzer Prizes than any other news organization, showed by cowardly refusing to print a controversial “Charlie Hebdo” cover. The French satirical weekly magazine saw 12 of its staffers killed by terrorists Jan. 7.
“Out of respect to our readers we have avoided those we felt were offensive,” New York Times executive editor Dean Baquet told The Huffington Post (LINK) on Monday night, shortly after the Charlie Hebdo cover was released online.
“Many Muslims consider publishing images of their prophet innately offensive and we have refrained from doing so,” Baquet said, adding the paper doesn’t print things that it considers a “gratuitous insult.”
And with that decision the Times become the only major newspaper NOT to publish the Hebdo cover. The Washington Post, Wall Street Journal, USA Today, the Los Angeles Times, the New York Daily News, and the New York Post all published it in recent days, noted the Huffington Post.
The Times was pummelled repeatedly on-line and via other news organizations around the world. Examples of how the nation’s second-largest newspaper freely insulted other religions over the decades were featured.
Its public editor, Margaret Sullivan, then declared the paper should have published the cover. Unfortunately, her mea culpa was too little, too late.
Rem Rieder at USA Today tried to take the high road and say the Times’ decision was “wrenching,” and that Sullivan somehow was forthright, but his column seemed gratuitous.
Sullivan very likely was involved with the initial editorial decision not to publish the cover. As the blowback exploded she then pulled the coulda, shoulda card.
The journalistic reputation of the New York Times was permanently damaged. No longer is it the standard-bearer for journalism that has held iconic status at journalism schools around the country.
It was a once-proud institution that was willing to print the Pentagon Papers, but now is just a shell of itself.
It now stands for nothing…
TELL THE TRUTH
NPR used the same logic for its lack of Charlie Hebdo images on its website. I would respect the NYT and NPR more if they will tell the truth and state they are scared for their safety.
TIMES HAS DESTROYED ITS CREDIBILITY
The New York Times has finally, after decades of wildly irrational progressive puffery, wholly destroyed their own credibility. The Charlie Hebdo issue is but the latest in a long line of ridiculous editorial positions. Duranty won the pulitzer in ’31 for his Stalin support writings in which he famously excused The Dictator’s Ukrainian famine with the classic line “But – to put it brutally – you can’t make an omelet without breaking eggs.” Walter Lippman was an equally progressive blowhard who embraced so many wrong positions that space limits citation. Today we see two more idiot lefties (Krugman and Friedman) who are almost never correct.
Sadly, they remain a powerful force in America’s media. The three “mainstream” broadcast networks continue …..to this very day…. parroting their positions on isssue after issue. Too bad for us as a nation.