The New York Times should be embarrassed for printing Maduro’s op-ed

Let’s file this one under the “no tiene nombre” category.  We’ve seen The New York Times print a lot of weird things over the years but this one is beyond belief.

Today, The NY Times published an op-ed by Mr Nicolas Maduro and it’s embarrassing.

Here are a couple of samples:

1) The post is titled “A Call for Peace”.   This is from the man behind attacks on demonstrators!  Are you kidding me?

2) This is how Mr Maduro sees Venezuela:

“THE recent protests in Venezuela have made international headlines. Much of the foreign media coverage has distorted the reality of my country and the facts surrounding the events.

Venezuelans are proud of our democracy. We have built a participatory democratic movement from the grass roots that has ensured that both power and resources are equitably distributed among our people.”

3) This is how Mr Maduro sees the economy:

“According to the United Nations, Venezuela has consistently reduced inequality: It now has the lowest income inequality in the region. We havereduced poverty enormously — to 25.4 percent in 2012, on the World Bank’sdata, from 49 percent in 1998; in the same period, according to government statistics, extreme poverty diminished to 6 percent from 21 percent.

We have created flagship universal health care and education programs, free to our citizens nationwide. We have achieved these feats in large part by using revenue from Venezuelan oil.

While our social policies have improved citizens’ lives over all, the government has also confronted serious economic challenges in the past 16 months, including inflation and shortages of basic goods. We continue to find solutions through measures like our new market-based foreign exchange system, which is designed to reduce the black market exchange rate. And we are monitoring businesses to ensure they are not gouging consumers or hoarding products. Venezuela has also struggled with a high crime rate. We are addressing this by building a new national police force, strengthening community-police cooperation and revamping our prison system.’

Outrageous is not outrageous enough.

This is journalistic malpractice by The New York Times.

I am not suggesting censorship.  I am simply calling on The New York Times to be responsible and hold “despots” like Maduro accountable for what they write.  Is that too much to ask?

6 thoughts on “The New York Times should be embarrassed for printing Maduro’s op-ed”

  1. Silvio, when has the Old Gray Lady, or better put, the Old Gray Whore ever had shame? She’s totally shameless. Asking her to feel embarrassed is like asking a whore in the middle of the night standing under a lamplight to feel embarrassed. That’s why she used to defend Stalin and helped create fidel castro. No wonder the New York Times headquarters is in the Time Square area of New York, and you know what Times Square was famous for, right? If you forgot, look at the movie, Taxi Driver.

  2. Ditto Rayarena. Our Pravda for Obama NYTimes has little to disagree with in what Maduro has to say. So much of it sounds suspiciously exactly like what Obama is trying to do to us. And they support Obama at every turn. So why should we be surprised that they would print this?

    Of course they would never have printed an editorial from Hitler no matter how beautiful the rhetoric. But then there was a time they would have hesitated to print an editorial from Mao or Stalin. Today I’m not so sure.

  3. I didn’t see any “Maduro” Op-Ed section. They even lied about that.

    That was a RAUL CASTRO… Op-Ed section!

  4. Are you kidding? Why would the NYT hold Maduro accountable for what he writes when it never held itself accountable for what Herbert Matthews wrote on its pages despite the disastrous consequences for millions of people? We’re not talking about a respectable entity, let alone an objective one; we’re talking about a pillar of leftist hubris doing what it’s done for ages–pushing its political agenda as if it were the Lord’s anointed, unquestionable and untouchable. Would it ever run an op-ed for a right-wing autocrat like, say, Batista? Absolutely not.

    As for feeling embarrassed, again, are you kidding? The NYT is no more likely to feel shame than Fidel Castro is likely to feel guilt. In both cases, the subject is so thoroughly convinced of its greatness and so enamored of its assumed persona that embarrassment is simply out of the question. The worst part, though, is how many people still take the NYT at face value, when it could hardly be more disreputable for a “serious” newspaper–and that’s the real problem, those who enable it.

Comments are closed.