Changes

''The New York Times'' is generally thought to promote a [[liberal]] point of view.<ref>[http://www.timeswatch.org/ TimesWatch: Documenting and Exposing the Liberal Political Agenda of the ''New York Times'']</ref><ref>[http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_luskin/luskin200407290744.asp Just Say It, Dan Okrent], National Review Online</ref> Its publisher, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. has denied this, claiming instead that the paper has an "urban" viewpoint.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?ei=5088&en=452926dcb11511a3&ex=1248667200&pagewanted=all&position=</ref>  However, in the summer of 2004, the newspaper's then public editor (ombudsman), Daniel Okrent, published a piece on the ''Times'' liberal bias, and cited the example of its coverage of [[Homosexuality and Marriage|homosexual marriage]].<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/facts/2007/facts2007914.asp</ref><ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?ei=5088&en=452926dcb11511a3&ex=1248667200&pagewanted=all&position=</ref>   

''The New York Times'' is generally thought to promote a [[liberal]] point of view.<ref>[http://www.timeswatch.org/ TimesWatch: Documenting and Exposing the Liberal Political Agenda of the ''New York Times'']</ref><ref>[http://www.nationalreview.com/nrof_luskin/luskin200407290744.asp Just Say It, Dan Okrent], National Review Online</ref> Its publisher, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, Jr. has denied this, claiming instead that the paper has an "urban" viewpoint.<ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?ei=5088&en=452926dcb11511a3&ex=1248667200&pagewanted=all&position=</ref>  However, in the summer of 2004, the newspaper's then public editor (ombudsman), Daniel Okrent, published a piece on the ''Times'' liberal bias, and cited the example of its coverage of [[Homosexuality and Marriage|homosexual marriage]].<ref>http://www.cnsnews.com/facts/2007/facts2007914.asp</ref><ref>http://www.nytimes.com/2004/07/25/weekinreview/25bott.html?ei=5088&en=452926dcb11511a3&ex=1248667200&pagewanted=all&position=</ref>   

Conservative organizations claim that ''New York Times'' promotes the [[homosexual agenda]], because it employs homosexuals and wins praise from homosexual groups. In 2001 Richard Berke, the national political correspondent for the New York Times, revealed that "on any given day, three-fourths of those attending the daily meeting where it is decided what will be on the front page of the Times, are likely to be 'not-so-closeted' homosexuals." <ref>http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/2001/23.html</ref> In 2004, the [[Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation]] (GLAAD) gave the New York Times an award for "Outstanding Newspaper Overall Coverage", specifically citing journalist Frank Rich's article attacking President [[Ronald Reagan]]'s record on [[AIDS]].<ref>http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/gay-lobby-honors-new-york-times/</ref>

Conservative organizations claim that ''Times'' promotes the [[homosexual agenda]], because it employs homosexuals and wins praise from homosexual groups. In 2001 Richard Berke, the ''Times''' national political correspondent, revealed that "on any given day, three-fourths of those attending the daily meeting where it is decided what will be on the front page of the Times, are likely to be 'not-so-closeted' homosexuals." <ref>http://www.aim.org/publications/aim_report/2001/23.html</ref> In 2004, the [[Gay & Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation]] (GLAAD) gave the New York Times an award for "Outstanding Newspaper Overall Coverage", specifically citing journalist Frank Rich's article attacking President [[Ronald Reagan]]'s record on [[AIDS]].<ref>http://www.aim.org/media-monitor/gay-lobby-honors-new-york-times/</ref>

In 2008, [[ABC]] journalist John Stossel claimed: "The reason the ''Times'', and to a lesser extent the ''Post'', are so important, and they are, is because the TV and radio - all of the media - copy it sycophantically. That's how bias at the ''Times'' becomes bias in other media."<ref>http://cnsnews.com/news/article/abcs-stossel-rips-network-hostility-conservatives</ref>

In 2008, [[ABC]] journalist John Stossel claimed: "The reason the ''Times'', and to a lesser extent the ''Post'', are so important, and they are, is because the TV and radio - all of the media - copy it sycophantically. That's how bias at the ''Times'' becomes bias in other media."<ref>http://cnsnews.com/news/article/abcs-stossel-rips-network-hostility-conservatives</ref>