Disappeared News

So Honolulu media choose to omit mention of seasick passengers on a ferry ride. Not a world-class concern perhaps (except that it makes me wonder what else I'm not being told when a big business advertiser is involved).

When the New York Times, however, deliberately chooses to skip coverage of a significant event such as the Winter Soldier hearings held last month near Washington DC, you know that manipulation is afoot.

FAIR (Fairness and Accuracy in Reporting) took them to task. At least, the Times editors responded to their concerns. We didn't know about it, they claimed. Barf!

You can decide for yourself if this great newspaper really didn't know about the hearing. Check out FAIR's article, New York Times Explains Winter Soldier Blackout, which begins:

New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt has offered a response to media activists who wrote to the paper about its non-coverage of last month's Winter Soldier hearings. Hoyt's explanation is that reporters at the Times had "not been aware of the group or its meeting," but likely wouldn't have covered it if they had been aware of the event.

The idea that the Times was unaware of Winter Soldier is remarkable; the paper's D.C. reporters were repeatedly sent press releases about the events, the same ones that other media outlets received that did manage to cover the event, ranging from Pacifica Radio's Democracy Now! to the New York Times' corporate sibling the Boston Globe.

Our local papers are, well, local. The New York Times is probably the most cited newspaper in the world. What they write is influential. With great power comes great responsibility.

Omitting coverage of the four-day Winter Soldier testimony was deliberate and revealing.

Check out also The Lies of our Times, by Amy Goodman and David Goodman.