“Former NY Times Executive Editor Jill Abramson Slams Media for [Under-reporting] Obamacare Success,” Tim Graham writes at NewsBusters:
Washington Post media blogger Erik Wemple reported that fired New York Times executive editor Jill Abramson feels “liberated” to say that the media’s failing to offer “big coverage” of how Obamacare is now working.
In an interview, Times media reporter David Carr spoke about Ebola:
He said, “We’ve come to believe that our government doesn’t know what it’s doing almost never. And we don’t trust ‘em. We don’t trust ‘em to handle it. . . . The president has a really bold, grand plan to insure everybody and the thing rolls out and just face-plants. You know, it doesn’t work.”
“Yeah, and now the computers are working and lots of people are signing up, and where’s all the big coverage of that story?” asked Abramson, who was sacked in the spring from her job atop the New York Times newsroom and is exploring a news start-up with Steve Brill. “See, I can now speak my mind; it’s very liberating.”
It’s a familiar tune that after decades of proclaiming that he’s an objective just-the-facts see-no-bias workaday newsman, when a nationally prominent reporter retires or goes from covering a beat to writing an opinion column, he invariably emerges as a full-on leftwing activist. (See also: Dan Rather and Walter Cronkite, when they each fell from their lofty perch as nightly newsreaders on CBS). But Abramson is taking this ancient cliche to new heights: no longer editor of the Times, “it’s very liberating” to now be an even more obnoxious high school cheerleader for the Obama administration and socialized medicine.
As if that were ever in doubt in the first place at the Times — or anywhere else in the MSM.