The New York Times

{{title-italics}}[[File:NYT Masthead.svg|thumb|right|165px]]{{media}}
{{cquote|New rallying cry on the right: "Even the liberal New York Times agrees that climate change is [[Balance fallacy|debatable.]]"|||{{wpl|Bruce Bartlett}}<ref>Bruce Bartlett (April 29, 2017). [https://web.archive.org/web/20230909150122/https://twitter.com/BruceBartlett/status/858410045373075459 Archived from the original on September 9, 2023.] ''Twitter''.</ref>}}

'''''The New York Times''''', a.k.a. the ''Wordle Picayune'',<ref>[https://www.thebulwark.com/p/this-is-how-people-become-anti-anti-fascist-nyt ''The New York Times'' and Anti-Anti-Fascism: On the burdens of solidarity.] by Jonathan V. Last (Sep 19, 2025) ''The Bulwark''.</ref> (All the News That's Fit to Print™), depending on who you ask, is either a ragsheet run by [[red-baiting|commies]], an obnoxious paywalled establishment ragsheet that is everything wrong with major [[United States|American]] news outlets,  or a winner of over a hundred Pulitzer Prizes.<ref>{{wpa|List of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times}}, as it keeps increasing every year</ref> The ''Times'' is best known for its crossword puzzle and for [[Paul Krugman]], both of which send secret messages (through clues and op-ed columns, respectively) that only [[liberal]]s can understand properly.

If someone is scanning the ''Times'' in public, you can be sure they're either a deceitful [[Liberalism|liberal]], or a good [[conservative]] checking out what liberals are up to.  Someone who laughs while reading the ''Times'' is a liberal, as no conservative would ever find the un-American, [[Islam|Muslim]]-loving articles humorous!

The ''Times'' also is widely read at many [[education|universities]] and [[environmentalism|environmental]] organizations.  When visiting these locations, make sure to keep low by hiding your ''[[Wall Street Journal]]'' inside the front pages of the ''Times''.

==In reality==
While the crazies over at the [[Media Research Center]] have accused the ''Times'' of having a [[liberal bias]],<ref>For example, the MRC operates a website critical of the newspaper, TimesWatch.org.</ref> there have been several instances where the paper has blatantly supported [[neoconservatism|neoconservative]] policies.  For instance, in the wake of [[Iran-Contra]], one editor acknowledged that the ''Times'' frequently adhered to the [[Ronald Reagan|Reagan]] administration strategy of heavily reporting on [[human rights]] abuses in [[Nicaragua]] by the leftist Sandinista government as a means to support the right-wing Contras. At the same time, the newspaper usually ignored worse cases by other Central American governments supported by the Reagan administration.<ref>[http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1543 Questionnaire for the New York Times on Its Central America Coverage], ''Extra!'': January/February 1988.</ref>  More recently, Clark Hoyt, public editor for the ''Times'', steadfastly refused to issue corrections for a discredited story involving the [[ACORN]] pimp [[hoax]].<ref>[http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=4043 NYT and the ACORN Hoax]</ref>

It may be more reasonable to say that if the paper of today has any actual bias, it trends toward [[American exceptionalism]] and preserving the establishment status quo, rather than toward any broad political ideology.  After all, the same newspaper which once published ''[[The Pentagon Papers]]'' now sidelines the release of leaked [[Afghan War]] documents in favor of personal attacks on [[WikiLeaks]] founder [[Julian Assange]].<ref>[http://www.salon.com/2010/10/24/assange_2/ The Times channels the Nixon administration]</ref>  The ''Times''' coverage of the leaks was strikingly suspect when compared with other media outlets; the paper chose to focus on doing its best to make sure the US didn't look bad, and refused to admit the documents showed that government officials had ever [[lie]]d about anything.<ref>[http://www.salon.com/2010/10/25/nyt_13/ NYT vs. the world: WikiLeaks coverage]</ref>  Following the same lines, it also led the charge on not calling [[waterboarding]] [[torture]] when it was being done by the US,<ref>"From the 1930s to 1999 the New York Times described waterboarding as torture 81% of the time; from 2002 to 08, 1.4%" - [http://www.theatlanticwire.com/politics/2010/07/study-examines-why-the-media-doesn-t-call-waterboarding-torture/23873/ Yep]</ref> while at the same time not caring to be pedantic when it came to the same abuses done by others.<ref>[http://www.salon.com/2011/03/09/journalism_11/ NYT and “torture”: Searching for a justification]</ref>  It finally made a rule change in 2014.<ref>[http://www.vox.com/2014/8/8/5983013/the-nyt-is-calling-cia-torture-torture-now-that-its-too-late-to-do The NYT is calling CIA torture "torture" now that it's too late to do anything about it]</ref>

[[Media Bias/Fact Check]] lists ''The New York Times'' as left-center.<ref>[https://mediabiasfactcheck.com/new-york-times/ Media Bias/Fact Check entry on ''The New York Times'']</ref>

Ironically for a paper constantly accused of left-wing bias, the ''Times'' started out life as a Republican paper, and during the New York Draft Riots of 1863 an attack on their office was averted by staff, including the paper's founder Henry Jarvis Raymond, manning Gatling guns mounted on the roof.<ref>[https://archive.is/YYtTZ "On This Day: August 1, 1863"] - NYT Student Connections Page</ref>

''The New York Times'' has also published articles that are sympathetic to [[astrology]] and other [[pseudoscience]]s.<ref>https://slate.com/human-interest/2018/06/the-new-york-times-coverage-of-wellness-concepts-like-detox-is-a-case-study-in-pseudoscience-creep.html</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/10/20/style/kiernan-shipka-sabrina-netflix.html</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/05/01/t-magazine/food/isabella-capece-galeota-cafe-maisie-juice-recipe.html</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2018/06/01/style/what-are-adaptogens.html?rref=collection/sectioncollection/fashion</ref> (Most of these are in the 
Woo
 Style section.) In fact, they have a whole column dedicated to this deceit.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/column/my-detox</ref> To be fair, they also publish pieces from pseudoscience critics.<ref>https://www.nytimes.com/roomfordebate/2015/12/22/what-is-the-appeal-of-astrology/the-trap-of-confirmation-bias?module=inline</ref><ref>https://www.nytimes.com/2006/11/11/nyregion/11mercury.html</ref>

''The Times'' has also been caught publishing [[Zionist]] ''[[Zionism#Weaponizing antisemitism|hasbara]]'' disguised as legitimate investigative journalism in 2024.<ref name="grim">[https://theintercept.com/2024/02/28/new-york-times-anat-schwartz-october-7/ "The Story Behind the New York Times October 7 Exposé"] - ''The Intercept''. Written by Jeremy Scahill, Ryan Grim, and Daniel Boguslaw (February 28, 2024). [https://archive.is/K6YJx Archived version here.]</ref> This propaganda disguised as reporting received internal criticism from within ''The Times'' as well.<ref name="grim"/> The writer of the article, Anat Schwartz, had no prior investigative journalistic experience and there were concerns that her "reporting" may have been marred by her bigotry against Palestinians.<ref name="grim"/> When ''The Times'' tried turning the piece into a podcast episode, it ultimately wasn't aired as it failed a fact check.<ref name="grim"/>

==Iraq War coverage==
The most notable controversy the paper has faced was that centering on its coverage leading up to the [[Iraq War]].<ref>[http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2004/may/29/iraq.usa1 How Chalabi and the White House held the front page]</ref>  Especially troublesome were stories backing the American government's position on [[WMD]]'s in Iraq, authored prominently by reporter {{wpl|Judith Miller (journalist)|Judith Miller}}.<ref> [http://www.fair.org/index.php?page=1150 The Great WMD Hunt], ''Extra!'': July/August 2003.</ref>  Miller's articles, which more or less echoed the claims of [[Bush]] administration officials, were then cited by those very same officials as justifications for war.  [[Truthiness]] in motion, you could say.  

Not to be outdone, fellow ''Times'' journalist [[Thomas Friedman]] backed the war effort to the extreme, repeatedly asserting (contrary to the reality on the ground) that all was well, and that we were likely to see the end of the conflict somewhere within the next six months. So widely criticized was the ''Times'' coverage on Iraq, they even had to print a half-hearted apology when all was said and done.<ref>[http://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/international/middleeast/26FTE_NOTE.html?pagewanted=all NYT "Apology"]</ref>

Despite all of the above, the ''New York Times'' does manage to produce some high quality [[journalism]]. The ''Times'' has won {{wpl|List of Pulitzer Prizes awarded to The New York Times|130 Pulitzer Prizes}} as of May 2021. However, about ''one'' of those prizes...

==Holodomor coverage==
{{main|Holodomor}}
Coverage by the ''Times'' about Iraq renewed attention in 2003 towards the Pulitzer Prize that was awarded seventy years earlier to ''Times'' correspondent Walter Duranty.<ref name="FolkenflikHolodomor"/>

Contemporary with the [[Holodomor]] in which millions of [[Ukrainian]]s (and over one million [[Russian]]s) starved to death under [[Joseph Stalin]]'s administration of the [[Soviet Union]], the ''Times'' printed apologia for the Soviet government written by Duranty, who reflected "the official opinion of the Soviet regime".<ref name="FolkenflikHolodomor">David Folkenflik (May 8, 2022). [https://www.npr.org/2022/05/08/1097097620/new-york-times-pulitzer-ukraine-walter-duranty "'The New York Times' can't shake the cloud over a 90-year-old Pulitzer Prize"]. ''NPR''.</ref> Duranty used his influential post at the ''Times'' to defend Joseph Stalin and Soviet authoritarianism, including in stories that appeared on the front-page of the ''Times''.<ref name="FolkenflikHolodomor"/> Denying the ongoing Holodomor famine, Duranty claimed in 1933 there was instead an "excellent harvest" and "any report of a famine in Russia is today an exaggeration or malignant propaganda." According to a British diplomat, Duranty knew this was a lie and acknowledged in private that millions had died from the famine.<ref name="FolkenflikHolodomor"/> Duranty, who was seemingly motivated to advance his career in journalism rather than to advance communism or to receive bribes from the Soviet government, received a Pulitzer Prize for that reporting.<ref name="FolkenflikHolodomor"/> It wasn't until the 1980s, five decades later, that the ''Times'' began to seriously criticize Duranty's work. There have since been pressure campaigns for the ''Times'' and the Pulitzer board to renounce Duranty's prize in journalism for his coverage of the Holodomor.<ref name="FolkenflikHolodomor"/> As of 2022, "The ''Times'' still lists Duranty among its Pulitzer winners. Even so, as Keller says, the newspaper has distanced itself from what Duranty wrote in its pages."<ref name="FolkenflikHolodomor"/>

==Flubs on discrimination==
===Slavery and segregation===
{{main|Slavery}}
In January 1859, the ''Times'' published an article proposing:

{{quotebox|The very best thing that could possibly be done towards the abolition of [[Slavery]] would be ''for the North to stop talking about it''. … Though, in our judgement, ''silence'' on on the part of the North concerning Slavery would be the best conceivable policy, there is not one chance in ten thousand that it will be adopted. … The Slavery question will continue to be discussed in the North; Abolitionists will continue to denounce, menace and alarm the South … Emancipation, if it ever comes under such circumstances, will come like a thief in the night … the result of [[American Civil War|some bloody catastrophe]], and do more harm than good to everybody concerned.<ref>(January 19, 1859). [http://query.nytimes.com/mem/archive-free/pdf?res=980CE4DC1E31EE34BC4152DFB7668382649FDE "The Abolition of Slavery"] (PDF). ''The New York Times''. [https://www.nytimes.com/1859/01/19/archives/the-abolition-of-slavery.html (Alternative link)].</ref>}}

The paper's gradualist flag flies high here.

Somewhat similar is an article from June 1961 about the Freedom Riders of the [[civil rights movement]]. Then, the ''Times'' argued:

{{quotebox|The Freedom Riders ought not to be enjoined by the courts from exercising their Constitutional rights. But, as we have urged before, the Freedom Riders should realize they have made their point and voluntarily cease their activities for a period during which the passions aroused by their recent efforts may subside. A similar position on this issue was taken last week by the Southern Regional Council, which is composed of both white and Negro liberals. The Council is entirely correct in advocating that the advantages gained be not pressed too far. The issue of desegregation can ultimately be solved only in the South and primarily by Southerners, white and Negro. Neither violence nor the steadily insistent provocation of violence can bring about the solution."<ref>(June 4, 1961). [https://www.nytimes.com/1961/06/04/archives/injunction-in-alabama.html "Injunction in Alabama"]. ''The New York Times''.</ref>}}

===Adolf Hitler, and the Holocaust===
{{main|Holocaust}}
In 1922, ''The Times'' first reported on [[Adolf Hitler]]:
{{quotebox|Several reliable, well-informed sources confirmed the idea that Hitler's [[antisemitism]] was not so genuine or violent as it sounded, and that he was merely using antisemitic propaganda as a bait to catch masses of followers and keep them aroused, enthusiastic, and in line for the time when [[Nazi Party|his organization]] is perfected and sufficiently powerful to be employed effectively for political purposes.|<ref>(February 11, 2015). [https://www.cbsnews.com/news/new-york-times-in-1922-hitlers-anti-semitism-was-not-so-genuine/ "New York Times in 1922: 'Hitler's anti-Semitism was not so genuine'"]. ''CBS News''.</ref><ref>Mark Bulik (February 10, 2015). [https://archive.nytimes.com/www.nytimes.com/times-insider/2015/02/10/1922-hitler-in-bavaria/ "1922: Hitler in Bavaria"]. ''Times Insider'' (The New York Times).</ref><ref>Nathan J. Robinson (July 4, 2018). [https://www.currentaffairs.org/news/2018/07/how-horrific-things-come-to-seem-normal "How Horrific Things Come To Seem Normal"]. ''Current Affairs''.</ref>}}
That may have been a bit wrong.

As reported by ''The Times'' itself in 1996, ''The Times'' "…grievously underplayed the Holocaust while it was going on."<ref name=rosenthal>[https://web.archive.org/web/20220324004954/https://www.nytimes.com/1996/09/24/opinion/5.5-billion-missing.html $5.5 Billion Missing] by A. M. Rosenthal (Sept. 24, 1996) ''The New York Times'' (archived from March 24, 2020).</ref><ref name=leff/>{{rp|19-191}} ''The Times'' was not alone in this among [[Mainstream media|major media outlets]],<ref name=rosenthal/> but it was particularly disconcerting since at the time, ''The Times'' was published by a religious [[Jew]], Arthur O. Sulzberger, Sr. Even in the immediate aftermath of [[World War II]], Sulzberger gave a speech in 1946 in which he partly blamed [[Zionist]] Jews for the Holocaust:
{{quotebox|It is my judgment that thousands now dead might be alive, and in [[Palestine]] as well, had there been through the past fifty years more emphasis upon George Washington’s great conception [of religious tolerance] and less on statehood.<ref name=leff>''Buried by the Times: the Holocaust and America's Most Important Newspaper'' by Laurel Leff (2005) Cambridge University Press. ISBN 0521812879.</ref>{{rp|320}}}}
[[Holocaust denial]] can take several forms, and include minimizing the impact of the Holocaust and blaming the Jews for their own [[genocide]].<ref>[https://holocaustremembrance.com/resources/working-definition-holocaust-denial-distortion Working Definition of Holocaust Denial and Distortion] ''International Holocaust Remembrance''.</ref>

===Anti-LGBT discrimination===
Homophobia at the ''Times'' was intense under {{w|A. M. Rosenthal}} (executive editor of the paper from 1977–1986), who is known to have personally hated gay people.<ref name="NYTKaiser">Charles Kaiser (September 26, 2023). [https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/sep/26/new-york-times-aids-gay-rights "'Rather devastating': how the New York Times came to terms with Aids"]. ''The Guardian''.</ref><ref>Jack Shafer (May 11, 2006). [https://slate.com/news-and-politics/2006/05/the-ugly-genius-of-a-m-rosenthal-1922-2006.html "A.M. Rosenthal (1922-2006)"]. ''Slate''.</ref><ref name="TNJM"/> (His tombstone says "<small>HE KEPT THE PAPER STRAIGHT</small>".<ref name="TNJM">Jack Mirkinson (February 20, 2023). [https://www.thenation.com/article/society/new-york-times-trans-coverage-gay-rights-history/ "The New York Times Is Repeating One of Its Most Notorious Mistakes"]. ''The Nation''.</ref>) ''The New York Times'' during that period largely prohibited using "gay" as a synonym for "homosexual, lacked coverage of gay experiences,<ref>David W. Dunlap (June 19, 2017). [https://archive.ph/nNBQM "How The Times Gave 'Gay' Its Own Voice (Again)"]. ''The New York Times''.</ref> and was accused of homophobia multiple times by a gay community newspaper in New York City, the ''New York Native''.<ref>David Rothenberg (1981). [https://archive.org/details/nynative4/page/n5 "Media Watch"]. Issue 4, page 7.</ref>{{efn|Though nothing hinges on the ''Native'''s accusation now since Rosenthal's homophobia is at this point historical record, this gives us some sense that it was somewhat known at the time. The ''New York Native'' later descended into [[HIV/AIDS denialism]] and other [[crank]]ery.<ref>{{wpa|New York Native}}</ref>}} On the 1981 cover of issue 13 for the ''Native'' was an article titled "Homophobia at the New York Times", written by {{w|David Rothenberg (activist)|David Rothenberg|,}} which said that while there were gay people working at the ''Times'', they were often in the closet to help their careers.<ref>David Rothenberg (1981). "Homophobia at the New York Times". ''The New York Native''. Issue 13, pages 1 and 14.</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Wallace |first=Lewis Raven |url=https://www.google.com/books/edition/The_View_from_Somewhere/BYqsEAAAQBAJ |title=The View from Somewhere: Undoing the Myth of Journalistic Objectivity |date=2023|publisher=University of Chicago Press |isbn=978-0-226-82658-5 |pages=108–109}}</ref> The ''Times'' published an early report on [[AIDS]], though it was not the first and it incorrectly said the disease posed no threat to non-homosexual people.<ref name="NYTKaiser"/><ref>Ted Kerr (July 2, 2020). [https://www.thebody.com/article/new-york-times-1981-gay-cancer-story-distorts-aids-history "39 Years Later, The New York Times’ 1981 ‘Gay Cancer’ Story Continues to Distort Early AIDS History"]. ''TheBody''.</ref>

Some commentators draw a parallel or connection between historic coverage of gay people by the ''Times'' and later coverage of [[transgender]] people.<ref name="TNJM"/><ref name="NYTLetter"/> In an analysis of ''Times'' coverage of nationwide [[Transphobia|anti-trans]] legislation from February 2023 to February 2024, [[Media Matters for America]] in association with GLAAD found that two-thirds of articles on the subject did not include the perspective of any trans people. Eighteen percent of the articles also included anti-trans misinformation.<ref>[https://www.mediamatters.org/new-york-times/seen-not-heard-new-york-times-failed-quote-trans-people-over-60-2023-stories-anti Seen but not heard: The New York Times failed to quote trans people in two-thirds of stories on anti-trans legislation in a one-year period: From February 15, 2023, through February 15, 2024, another 18% of such articles included anti-trans misinformation with no fact-checking] (03/26/24 10:01 AM EDT) ''Media Matters for America''.</ref> The paper's coverage of transgender people has been criticized by ~1,200<ref name="NYTLetter">[https://nytletter.com/ NYT Letter].</ref><ref>Ein Gastbeitrag von Jo Livingstone (March 8, 2023). [https://www.zeit.de/kultur/2023-03/coverage-trans-people-new-york-times-english "This is not about the 'New York Times'"]. ''Die Zeit''.</ref> of its own writers, which management had a sour response to, saying it would "not be tolerated"; this was because the letter calling attention to the problem had named specific examples, which management interpreted as an attack on colleagues.<ref>Dominick Mastrangelo (February 16, 2023). [https://thehill.com/homenews/3862101-nyt-editors-paper-will-not-tolerate-its-journalists-protesting-coverage-of-transgender-people/ "NYT editors: Paper 'will not tolerate' its journalists protesting coverage of transgender people"]. ''The Hill''.</ref> Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting (FAIR) compared the ''Times'' coverage of transgender topics to that of ''[[The Washington Post]]'' (in the 2022–2023 period), judging the ''Post'' to have better coverage while stating they "both have a recent history of ceding the framework of their trans coverage to the right wing, as a political football rather than an attack on trans people's right to bodily autonomy and self-determination."<ref>Julie Hollar (May 11, 2023). [https://fair.org/home/nyts-anti-trans-bias-by-the-numbers/ "NYT's Anti-Trans Bias—by the Numbers"]. Fairness & Accuracy In Reporting.</ref>

GLAAD argued the ''Times'' is biased against trans people to the point of their articles on the topic area being inaccurate, citing (for example) their mostly-uncritical repetition of inaccurate statements by anti-trans politicians, and testimony by families interviewed by the ''Times'' who said their "personal stories were spun and twisted". GLAAD also points out that the ''Times'' had "covered Utah's legislative attacks against the transgender community in more than half a dozen stories, but did not cover the Utah legislature's study finding that transgender health care benefits trans youth."<ref name="GLAADPodcast"/> This refers to a study with an unexpected result that was published in May 2025 and also contradicts some ''Times'' claims about the evidence base for trans medicine.<ref>Emily Anderson Stern (May 22, 2025). [https://www.fox13now.com/news/local-news/utah-lawmakers-own-study-found-gender-affirming-care-benefits-trans-youth-will-they-lift-the-treatment-ban "Utah lawmakers’ own study found gender-affirming care benefits trans youth. Will they lift the treatment ban?"]. ''FOX 13''.</ref><ref>Evan Urquhart (May 27, 2025). [https://www.assignedmedia.org/breaking-news/plentiful-data-no-regret-utah-review "Plentiful Data, No Regret: What the Utah Review on Youth Trans Care Found"]. ''Assigned Media''.</ref> GLAAD also stated:
{{cquote|The Times' coverage has been cited by multiple anti-LGBTQ politicians to justify legalizing discrimination and criminalizing support for transgender people, a fact the Times itself has never covered. A recent example: a wildly inaccurate and graphic Department of Justice memo seeking to criminalize health care providers included as its number one citation an inflammatory article from the New York Times boosting [[Littman 2018 ROGD study|the debunked theory about the rise in transgender youth]], alongside dubious sources including The New York Post, Fox News, and error and animus-filled documents from the Trump White House.|||<ref name="GLAADPodcast">(June 5, 2025). [https://glaad.org/nyt-podcast-trans-healthcare/ "The New York Times Continues to Double Down on Biased, Inaccurate Transgender Coverage"]. ''GLAAD''.</ref>}}

According to a 2026 interview with a former ''Times'' editor, the shift towards an anti-trans editorial stance began around 2022 and was directed top-down by the paper's corporate management, also supported by a small anti-[[Labor union|union]] group among staff.<ref>David Forbes (January 1, 2026). [https://transnews.network/p/a-directive-from-above-former-nyt-editor-lays-out-how-the-paper-pushes-anti-trans-bigotry "'A Directive From Above': Former NYT Editor Lays Out How The Paper Pushes Anti-Trans Bigotry"]. ''Trans News Network''.</ref>

==See also==
*[[CNN]]
*''[[New York Post]]''
*''[[Wall Street Journal]]''
*''[[The Washington Post]]''

===Columnists we have articles on===
*[[Paul Krugman|The Krug]]
*[[David Brooks|The Bobo]]
*[[Thomas Friedman|The Moustache of Understanding]]
*[[Ross Douthat|The Chunky Reese Witherspoon]]

==External links==
*''[http://www.nytimes.com/ New York Times]''
*''[http://www.usatoday.com/ USA Today]'', another liberal rag.
*''[http://www.latimes.com/ LA Times]'', a lesser-known copycat propagandist tool.
*[http://www.nytimes.com/2014/07/25/upshot/a-tool-to-trace-words-through-time.html Track the historical use of words in the ''Times'']
*[http://newsdiffs.org/ Track revisions to articles from popular news sites, most notably the ''Times'']
*Lulz: ''NYT'''s critical review of (pro-''Times'' and well-received) doc [http://www.nytimes.com/2011/06/17/movies/page-one-inside-the-new-york-times-review.html ''Page One: Inside The New York Times'']

==Notes==
{{reflist|group=note}}

==References==
{{reflist|2}}
 
{{DEFAULTSORT:New York Times, The}}
[[Category:American media]]
[[Category:Holocaust denialists]]
[[Category:Newspapers]]
[[Category:New York]]
[[Category:Transphobia]]

Categories: American media, Holocaust denialists, Newspapers, New York, Transphobia