The NYT editorial board has a very tough job: “To understand what we’ve seen, we have to start somewhere.”
The New York Times editorial board wrote on Wednesday about the way the media coverage of the “fierce, often ugly, often personal” civil war in Syria has been characterized.
They wrote that, “As much as any news organization, the Times has been in the trenches of Syria for decades, and we have seen many of the events unfold before our very eyes.”
The Times editorial noted that while the coverage has been “fraught with nuance,” it is the only media outlet “with a track record of telling the truth.”
The newspaper also pointed out that the coverage of this war has been mixed at best, and, “It is the media’s job to inform and not to sensationalize, but the tone of this reporting has been too harsh and too sensationalized.”
But, it added, “it is not difficult to be tough in a way that does not require us to be impossible.”
The NYT opined that the way journalists have portrayed this conflict has been a “disaster” for both sides.
The paper noted that the conflict in Syria is not a one-sided battle between the Syrian government and the rebels, and that both sides have the right to defend themselves.
It also noted that “the world does not need to see the same bloody conflict from the U.S. and its allies.
It’s time to look beyond, to see a world that respects human rights and democracy and embraces pluralism.”
“It’s not a war of the West against the world,” the editorial concluded.
“It isn’t a war between the rebels and the regime, but a war for the future of Syria.”
It also added that the U, S. and Israel are “both playing a role in making this conflict,” and that, despite the media bias, the United States “has not done enough to end the conflict.”
They also noted the “lack of a clear national narrative” in Syria, and urged reporters to “use every tool at their disposal” to “understand and understand the complicated war” and “recreate the story of Syria in a more accurate way.”
The editorial was written by the Times’ managing editor, Dean Baquet.
“The war in the Middle East has a long history, from the Crusades and the Ottoman Empire to the Arab uprisings of the 1960s and 1970s, and its roots go back to the days of empires like the Romans and Byzantines,” Baquet said.
“But, this time, it’s different, not just because of the war in Iraq but also because of how we describe the conflicts around the world, which, in this case, include the wars in Syria and Iraq.”
The opinion of the NYT Editorial Board has a unique way of looking at things, Baquet noted.
The Times “is not a journalist,” he said.
Instead, the paper is “a media organization that covers the world and provides insight into the world.”
The paper is run by a group of seasoned journalists, including Pulitzer Prize winner Maureen Dowd, who “has a unique understanding of the challenges and opportunities that lie ahead for this country.”
“Maureen’s insight is essential to our journalism,” Baquett said.
Baquet called the Times “a champion of the truth” and noted that it has “always been our policy to do our best to cover the world accurately.”
“We have a unique responsibility to report the news honestly, without bias, and without fear of judgment,” Baque wrote.
“We can’t be the newspaper that tells the truth about what’s happening in Syria.
We cannot be the media that is the voice of those whose lives are on the line.”
The op-ed came on the heels of a Washington Post op-eds piece that came out last week that criticized President Trump for being “too tough on the president” and the press for reporting on the Syrian conflict.
The Post wrote that the president has “dramatically” increased U.N. Security Council sanctions on Syria in response to the Syrian military’s actions.
The piece noted that Trump has been accused of doing more than just criticizing the Syrian leader, he has been criticizing the U to the world.
Trump has called the Syrian rebels “criminals” and said that the country needs to be cleansed of Assad.
The article went on to note that “The president’s approach is to make it harder for us to tell the truth and, as a result, to increase the pressure on us to paint a clearer picture of what is going on in Syria.”
The president’s remarks about the media “were the most egregious I’ve ever seen,” the Post’s Philip Bump wrote.
The editorial board also criticized the president for his “unwillingness to back down and to take a tough stance against Assad,” saying the U will “never win a war unless we put down the gun.”