Walking home today, I was accosted by one of Dan Garodnick's army of support staff who thrust a pamphlet into my hand. Usually I attempt to dodge anyone who tries to give me anything on a New York City street; however the flyer caught my attention.
According to the flyer Dan Garodnick is a Democrat campaigning for City Council and he is endorsed by the New York Times.
Mr Garodnick was actually available on the street, so I asked him what this meant. He simply said the NYT decided to support him over Republican candidate Patrick Murphy.
I was skeptical about this claim. I wondered how a newspaper that is supposed to be objective and unpartisan can support a political candidate. However, sure enough, a Lexis-Nexus search uncovered an article from the City Weekly Desk endorsing Garodnick, printed on Oct. 23.
On Lexus-Nexis it is impossible to tell that this article is an Editorial, however there is a scan of the article available on Garodnick’s website that does clearly mark the endorsement as Editorial.
However the sticker on Garodnick’s flyer simply says, 'Endorsed by The New York Times'. This statement is misleading. Surely it is not the institution of the NYT that supports this political endorsement (i.e. the same institution that promises objectivity and impartiality) but those responsible for the editorial.
However, neither the Lexus-Nexis article, nor the scan from the NYT has a byline for the piece. This is problematic because a reader (or recipient of the flyer) can not pinpoint who within the NYT has made this endorsement. So it appears the endorsement came from the New York Times institution.
If the endorsement of a political candidate cannot be attributed to particular writers in the NYT, it is by default attributed to the paper. It is not the role of a newspaper to direct voters towards a particular candidate, rather it is their role to provide citizens with information needed to make their own decision.
At the very least Garodnick’s sticker on his flyer should say, ‘Endorsed by the Editorial staff of the New York Times.’ And the NYT should make it more apparent to their readers who is making this statement within the paper. Otherwise they stand to lose credibility as an objective news sources.
Anonymous (not verified) @ November 8, 2005 - 8:18pm
Dan Garodnick hasn't done anything improper. For over 200 years, newspapers have been endorsing candidates. It is well known that endorsements are made by the editorial board, not the news department. Therefore, we all know what it means to be endorsed by the NY Times.
You're looking for an issue that doesn't exist. Find something else to complain about.
In the meantime, vote for Dan Garodnick. The Times is right: He's a great candidate.
»