A new report reveals journalists at major media outlets are personally donating money to the Democratic Party politicians they cover as part of their ostensibly neutral “reporting.” The exposé notes that “journalists at The New York Times, Boston Globe, and Houston Chronicle are among dozens of reporters, editors, and other newspeople who’ve given tens of thousands of dollars to political candidates and causes.”
Love Is Blue
Dave Levinthal at Business Insider culled Federal Election Commission records for his report, which was published Oct. 28. Levinthal stressed two conclusions.
- The amounts of donations are undoubtedly far higher than what he was able to verify.
- The vast majority of journalism donations went to Democrats.
He explained:
“Insider found that between January 1, 2019, and August 31, 2020, working journalists had contributed at least $110,000 to federal-level political committees. Because FEC contribution data contains omissions and errors, and Insider could not definitively confirm some contributions attributed in public records to journalists, the number is likely higher than $110,000.
There’s one commonality among members of the media who did give politicians money this election: Nearly all their cash went to Democratic candidates and causes, particularly [Democrat presidential nominee Joe] Biden and [former Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie] Sanders [I-VT].”
Levinthal unearthed the following at Los Angeles Times:
“Federal records show that deputy business editor Jeff Bercovici, photo editor Robert St. John, entertainment and culture writer Jessica Gelt, and copyeditors Lisa Horowitz and Rachel Dunn together made hundreds of dollars’ worth of political contributions that benefited a variety of Democratic committees, including the campaigns of Biden, Sanders, Sen. Elizabeth Warren, and the Democratic National Committee. Bercovici has written this year about political matters.”
Cratering Credibility
According to his official Times bio, Bercovici “is a deputy Business editor overseeing technology coverage.” This means that the dominant daily newspaper in the second-largest city in America has employed a Democrat financial donor to cover Silicon Valley’s ongoing efforts to censor President Trump and conservative voices on its social media platforms.
Guess how this ends up? Bercovici shared a byline on a May 29 Times article offered as straight news that deplored what it considered to be Twitter’s tepid steps to censor the tweets of the sitting president of the United States. The article noted that a “Get the facts” warning label that Twitter added to a Trump tweet about mail-in balloting linked “to a bulleted list of statements that dismantled the president’s claims.”
But the reporters lamented that another Trump tweet about rioting in the wake of the George Floyd killing – “which implied that protesters in Minneapolis could be shot,” as they put it – was allowed to remain on the site, albeit with a warning label about how it violated the social media goliath’s “glorification of violence” standards.
“[T]he fact that Twitter hasn’t taken action on a Trump tweet until now, despite abundant opportunities, shows that the company has reservations of its own about taking on @realdonaldtrump and his loud and loyal followers,” Bercovici and article co-author Suhauna Hussain concluded.
Lest there be any doubts as to what Bercovici has in mind, here is our intrepid reporter, on his Twitter account, giving his surely unbiased professional opinion on just how Twitter and Facebook should deal with the president:
“Feeling increasingly like there’s no honest way for Facebook and Twitter to do what they say they’re trying to do on election disinformation without straight-up banning Trump. He’s just going to keep breaking the rules every day until the election. He’s daring them to do it.”
Levinthal reports that, “[a]fter Insider’s inquiries this month, at least two news organizations, the Los Angeles Times and The Hill, confirmed that they had, even before this story’s publication, reprimanded journalists who had recently made political contributions.”
Bercovici has not had a byline since July 15, but his title as “Deputy Business Editor” remains unaffected.
The Hill told Levinthal that it had suspended political reporter Niv Elis for his “lack of judgment.” Levinthal reports that Elis:
“has given $150 to [Sen. Elizabeth] Warren [D-MA] and $100 to [Democrat senatorial candidate in Kentucky] Amy McGrath this election cycle, FEC records show. Elis regularly writes about US government and politics, including Warren and McGrath’s opponent in Kentucky, Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell.”
During the 2019 Democratic primary, Elis on multiple occasions heralded the rise of Warren under the guise of a political reporter, not a partisan supporter of the Massachusetts senator. He tweeted things like “Interesting. Is Warren shaking up the race?” and “Elizabeth Warren’s wealth tax is quite popular. So why are Congressional Democrats so hesitant to embrace it?”
As Levinthal’s report makes clear, the woefully misnamed “mainstream media” no longer exists, if it ever truly did. Big-box media organs are rife with biases that they are displaying in more overt tones as their abject loathing of Donald Trump continues to gnaw at their brain matter. In a way, these new revelations make the naked partisanship of such leftist outfits as CNN and NBC, which has completely gone off a woke cliff in recent months, refreshing.
Say what you will about him, but Don Lemon’s diva grandstanding is far more honest than these so-called reporters who ludicrously cling to an antiquated notion that journalism is a sacred calling on par with religious clergy or the medical profession, filled with noble souls who are only devoted to serving humanity. “Uncovering the truth” is their alleged curative gift. It is a silly fiction that long ago should have been put to rest.
~
Read more from Joe Schaeffer.
