What Media Bias? NY Times Won’t Include Ted Cruz’s Book on Bestsellers List

Ted Cruz A Time For Truth
(Image: FOX News Latino)

Despite the fact that it’s already selling very well, the New York Times won’t include Ted Cruz’s new book on their bestsellers list. If more people were able to learn about Cruz and his positive vision for America, they might actually like him and the New York Times can’t have that.

Dylan Byers of Politico:

N.Y. Times keeps Cruz off bestseller list

The New York Times informed HarperCollins this week that it will not include Ted Cruz’s new biography on its forthcoming bestsellers list, despite the fact that the book has sold more copies in its first week than all but two of the Times’ bestselling titles, the On Media blog has learned.

Cruz’s “A Time For Truth,” published on June 30, sold 11,854 copies in its first week, according to Nielsen Bookscan’s hardcover sale numbers. That’s more than 18 of the 20 titles that will appear on the bestseller list for the week ending July 4. Aziz Ansari’s “Modern Romance,” which is #2 on the list, sold fewer than 10,000 copies. Ann Coulter’s “Adios America,” at #11, sold just over half as many copies.

Cruz’s publisher contacted the Times and got a predictably lame response:

This week, HarperCollins, the book’s publisher, sent a letter to The New York Times inquiring about Cruz’s omission from the list, sources with knowledge of the situation said. The Times responded by telling HarperCollins that the book did not meet their criteria for inclusion.

If any of this sounds familiar to you, it should. In 2008, as the media was going ga-ga over Barack Obama, the New York Times refused to publish an op-ed by John McCain:

The Times and the McCain Op-Ed

The Op-Ed section of The New York Times has decided not to publish an opinion piece submitted by Senator John McCain in response to one published last week by his Democratic rival, Senator Barack Obama, on his plan for Iraq.

The decision occurs against the backdrop of the candidates’ dueling visions on the war in Iraq and how to handle the war going forward, particularly whether there should be a timetable for withdrawal or “time horizons” as spoken by President Bush or a measured troop presence for the foreseeable future to maintain stability.

Keep all of this in mind the next time anyone tells you there’s no bias against conservatives in media.

Care to guess how many journalists self-identify as ‘liberal’ in the latest poll?

media bias
(Before It’s News)

It’s a wonder Republicans ever win any election in America.

They run for office on a hopelessly uneven playing field, created by referees (the media) who are openly rooting for the other team.

The good news is that voters seem to recognize and disapprove of the bias, and many do not allow it to sway their decisions when they step into the ballot booth.

Of course the media wields a great deal of power and influence over American public opinion.

It chooses the issues that get news coverage, and frequently presents information in a manner designed to manipulate public reaction.

That’s just the way it is in a free society with a necessarily vigorous and unobstructed media.

And of course reporters are overwhelmingly liberal and tend to work overtime to give Democratic candidates and their issues a boost.

Media types have always denied it, but there’s a mountain of conclusive evidence.

The newly-released results of a 2013 survey of 1,080 television, print and online journalists showed that 28 percent consider themselves Democrats and only seven percent say they are Republicans.

About 50 percent identified themselves as politically “independent,” which is far more appropriate for a journalist, and would be a good sign if it were indeed the truth.

But the percentage of self-identified “independent” journalists increased by a suspiciously high 18 percent since 2002, according to Newsbusters.org.

Perhaps their embarrassingly overt worship of Barack Obama during the 2008 campaign shamed some of them back into the ideological closet, but their preference is still obvious and their bias remains detectable in their work.

A 2010 report from the Media Research Center revealed the following:

A poll of journalists by the American Society of Newspaper editors found that self-identified liberals outnumbered conservatives in newsrooms 61 percent to 15 percent.

More than four-fifths of surveyed journalists said they voted for the Democratic presidential nominee in every election between 1964 and 1976.

In 1992, 88 percent of surveyed D.C. reporters said they voted for Bill Clinton for president. In 2004, the same group said it supported Democrat John Kerry over President George W. Bush by a 12-to-1 margin.

In 2009, a whopping 96 percent of the staff working for the online Slate magazine said they supported Barack Obama for president.

And get this – in the American Society of Newspaper Editors poll, 71 percent of editors admitted that reporters’ opinions “sometimes” or “often” influence their coverage.

“Are reporters biased? There is no doubt that — I’ve worked at the Wall Street Journal, the Washington Post, and worked here at Politico. If I had to guess, if you put all of the reporters that I’ve ever worked with on truth serum, most of them vote Democratic,” said Politico’s Jim VandeHei in 2012.

Given all of this, one might expect the U.S. to be a largely single-party state, with Democrats in control of pretty much everything.

That’s obviously not the case, which is a tribute to the intelligence of the American voter.

According to the Media Research Center report, most voters understand they’re being fed an incomplete picture by liberal journalists.

In every presidential election since 1992, most Americans said the media clearly backed the Democratic candidate.

In 2008, 70 percent of poll respondents perceived the media as being supportive of Obama, compared to 9 percent who said it favored Republican nominee John McCain.

“Nearly nine out of 10 Americans (87 percent) strongly or somewhat agreed that the news media have their own political and public policy positions and attempt to influence public opinion,” the report said.

But here’s a key stat – Only 29 percent of poll respondents think reporters consistently get the facts correct, and only 18 percent said the media is fair.

The message is that most voters take news reports of political campaigns with a grain of salt and still vote the way they believe.

If that weren’t the case, there’s no way the GOP would control the U.S. House. There’s no way 29 out of 50 governors would be Republicans.

And the idea of Republicans regaining the U.S. Senate this year or the White House in 2016 would be laughable.

But those things might very well happen, despite the best efforts of the media.

So here’s to the average American voter, who is obviously smarter than most people think.

That’s probably why we have such a great nation, and the future still holds a great deal of promise.

Authored by Steve Gunn

Another Trayvon! Just Kidding, This Crime Doesn’t Fit The Narrative Frame

"The biggest crime in the U.S. criminal justice system is that it is a race-based institution where African-Americans are directly targeted and punished in a much more aggressive way than white people." -Bill Quigley “The biggest crime in the U.S. criminal justice system is that it is a race-based institution where African-Americans are directly targeted and punished in a much more aggressive way than white people.” –Bill Quigley

Trayvon Martin was an innocent, urban youth of promise who planned to go to college, escape the hood, write poetry in the same style as Langston Hughes, make documentary films, and probably even donate to Oxfam occasionally. He certainly wasn’t representative of the obvious-to-everyone but still a mystery to the mainstream media that young black men commit an unbelievably disproportionate amount of crime in the country.

For the thoughtcrime of thinking that probable-cat burglar Trayvon might be a cat burglar, George Zimmerman was almost convicted of murder. The entire media infrastructure and elites came out to villainize Martin. No doubt many pro-Trayvon movies are in production.

And so when, in Madison, Wisconsin, a young couple was awoken to four burglars ransacking their home, threatening to kill them, and then viciously raping the wife, you would think that, in context, it would get noticed by the mainstream media.

Oh did I mention the wife was six months pregnant and pleading for her baby’s life?

In supposedly racist America, you can’t even drive around town without being pulled over for “Driving while Black” and yet, stories like this seem to be missed by the racist white overlords running our media industry.

Surely they haven’t missed other stories like this, like those of the Wichita horror or the Channon Christian and Andrew Newsom murders. David Berkowitz killed six people and from that there have been four movies and three songs. How many times do we even hear about these kind of crimes?

Google News reports just 15 mentions of this crime in the media. There are 9,450 current news stories about Travyon Martin. This is despite the fact that Travyon Martin was shot while beating George Zimmerman nearly two years prior to this crime happening.

The most charitable interpretation of the absence of liberal outrage here, even from supposedly pro-woman groups, is that it’s just manufactured outrage in order to achieve a political end. Trayvon was a convenient media framing and so they jump at the opportunity to trot out the tired cliche of racist whites driving trucks gunning down young black men. But a slightly less charitable interpretation is that they enjoy and encourage this kind of behavior, that they feel as though these are morally justified rapes and attempted murders because the victims are from the undesirable class.

Black entertainers rap about killing whites. Leaders proclaim to kill whites. Even white liberals talk about and strategize how to kill white babies.

But white liberals repeat ad nauseum that the criminal justice system is unfixably racist. Bill Quigley, a Louisiana law professor, says, writ large, that “The criminal justice system, from start to finish, is seriously racist.” Yale Professor Vesla Weaver says we live in a “racial democracy” where only whites get to vote because they’re the ones who aren’t felons. This is the quality of intellectual honesty where they avoid any chance that the individuals convicted of crimes might actually be guilty.

Yet, it’s “racist” to talk about such things, to even acknowledge that this is the underlying mindset of a shockingly surprising amount of the left: whatever is bad for whites is good for the left. Whatever hurts white people as a group helps the organized left.

If the progressive left will justify coercive government policies to benefit one group at the expense of another, why not rejoice when those groups fight with one another and the undesirable group suffers as a result? When you operate a healthcare system that doesn’t care about individual wrongs, why would you care about one crime in one place from the undesirable group.

This type of crime cover-up by the media is nothing new, and will no doubt only continue to get worse. Hence why you’ve probably never heard of Mona Nelson. The media isn’t hiding their race agenda now when reporting the news. It’s no longer all the facts, it’s screened now to fit their particular agenda.