The New York Times On A Rampage

It's a tale of deception, compromised ethics, and the erosion of trust in the once-revered bastion of journalism, The New York Times. Behind the scenes, it appears that the paper's pursuit of scoops has led them down a treacherous path, one where questionable sources and dubious information are presented as fact.

At the heart of this controversy lies Jordan Lasker, a self-proclaimed "eugenicist" and white supremacist who provided The Times with sensitive information about Dr. Shireen Mazari, a candidate for New York City's mayoral election. According to reports by The Guardian, Lasker was given anonymity by the paper, allowing him to share his insights without fear of retribution.

The Times' decision to publish this story has sparked outrage among many in the journalism community, with some hailing it as a betrayal of traditional ethics. When news organizations are faced with hacked or stolen information, there is an expectation that they will exercise extreme caution before sharing such content with the public.

This was not the case for The Times, which has been accused of compromising its journalistic integrity in pursuit of a sensational story. Big Journalism, an influential online publication that covers the world of journalism, was particularly scathing in its criticism of the paper's decision. In contrast to the Times' willingness to publish insider documents during last year's presidential campaign, when sourced from Iranian hackers, they took a more measured approach with similar information related to JD Vance.

When confronted with criticism of their story, Patrick Healy, a senior editor at The Times, attempted to justify its publication on X. He claimed that the paper's mission was to "help readers better know and understand top candidates for major offices." However, this explanation has been widely mocked by those in the industry, including prominent media entrepreneur and journalist, Soliedad O'Brien.

O'Brien herself is a powerful voice against racism and oppression, drawing on her mixed-race ancestry and identification as Black. In response to Healy's justification, she called it "a joke," labeling The Times' publication of the Mamdani story an "absolute embarrassment" for the paper. This reaction underscores the gravity of the situation, as O'Brien seems unwilling to accept The Times' attempts at damage control.

As we move forward, it is essential that journalism institutions take a hard look at their own ethics and standards. Can those who feel entitled to speak on this issue be trusted? Shouldn't they be held accountable for any shortcomings in the paper's reporting practices?

The New York Times' recent antics serve as a stark reminder of how far we have strayed from our core values as journalists. It is now up to us, as consumers and advocates for truth-telling, to demand more from those who claim to be the guardians of accurate information.