(Conservative Review) -- Many have taken notice of the New York Times’ lack of moral consistency in its coverage of the countrywide protests in Iran against the theocratic regime that rules there. From declaring that the president of Iran is a “moderate” to underselling the freedom-seeking ambitions of the average Iranian citizen, much of the Times coverage lately has devolved into unjust equivocations between the theocratic regime and the average Iranian citizen who wishes not to be ruled by Islamic theocrats.
Over the years, the Times has developed a reputation as one of the friendliest U.S.-based publications to the Iranian regime. It is one of the few Western outlets that’s been able to embed a reporter in Tehran without incident (the Washington Post’s Jason Rezaian was imprisoned in Iran for 545 days). Today, the Times offers nonstop editorials depicting the regime as an honest broker, and the Manhattan publication was one of the most fervent supporters of the Iran nuclear deal.
The recent protests in Iran have raised many red flags and questions as to whether the Times is reporting the news objectively. As videos continue to surface on social media, showing masses of people calling for an end to the regime (and even “death to the Islamic Republic”), the New York Times has downplayed the protests as merely economic disputes. Moreover, the paper’s Tehran-based reporter was conveniently “on vacation” as the most consequential, anti-regime protests in years spread through Iran like wildfire.
Advertisement - story continues below