Question: Why should we boycott The New York Times?

Answer: Because The Times has, over the course of decades, deliberately distorted the news to advance its leftist political agenda – a pro-abortion, pro-big government, anti-family, anti-defense, isolationist ethic. The Times’ bias is reflected in its double standard in coverage of liberals and conservatives (as well as Democrats and Republicans), its misreporting of election news, the hidden assumptions that underlie news stories (the rich aren’t paying enough taxes, abortion is a right, same-sex marriage is a matter of fairness, man-made Global Warming is incontrovertible, etc.) and in the palpable imbalance in commentary. Its motto (“All The News That’s Fit To Print’) should be “All the News That Fits,” in terms of advancing our agenda.

Question: But why boycott The New York Times and not The Washington Post, The Los Angeles Times, CBS Evening News, Time Magazine and the like? Aren’t they just as biased?

Answer: Because The New York Times isn’t just another media outlet. It sets the tone for the establishment media. The Times is known as America’s “newspaper of record.” If something is a front-page story in The Times, that immediately gives it credibility and demonstrates that it’s news-worthy. The Times’ coverage (including its bias) is re-broadcast throughout the mainstream media. Unfortunately, The Times’ influence extends far beyond the number of newspapers sold or hits on its website. It is, without question, the trendsetter when it comes to news coverage – which makes it the most powerful media voice in America, and – perhaps – the world.

Question: What are you trying to accomplish?

Answer: We’re not trying to put The New York Times out of business, though that would delight us. We also think it’s unlikely that The Times will have a change of heart and suddenly begin reporting the news, instead of distorting it to promote its politics. (It’s probably beyond redemption.) Rather, our goal is to expose The Times and to rally the public against it through a boycott. In so doing, we seek to progressively limit its influence.

Question: Doesn’t The New York Times have a First Amendment right to publish whatever it chooses – biased or not?

Answer: Of course it does – assuming that what it prints isn’t libelous or otherwise illegal. But The Times has a duty to its readers and the general public (which it impacts in countless ways, every day) – a duty to be accurate, objective and balanced in its coverage. At the same time, we too have First Amendment rights – including a right to protest media bias with a boycott.

Question: But why a boycott?

Answer: There are any number of organizations and publications dedicated to documenting media bias – all of them doing good work. We believe more is needed. A boycott demonstrates our seriousness. It’s a last resort in confronting America’s most powerful media outlet – one whose bias goes back at least as far as the Vietnam era — one that is incorrigible, impervious to criticism and totally unwilling to change.

A boycott also gives the public an opportunity to take direct action. Instead of just complaining (we give them an opportunity to do that as well), those who sign our petition are putting The New York Times and its advertisers on notice that they won’t subscribe to The Times, buy the paper or visit its website. As more and more Americans make the pledge, it will become apparent that media bias has consequences.

Question: Isn’t there something a bit extreme about boycotting a newspaper? Are you trying to abridge its First Amendment rights?

Answer: Only the government can violate freedom of speech because only government can censor the expression of ideas. Boycotts have a long and distinguished history in America. You might even say that our nation started with a boycott – when the colonists boycotted British tea. The Civil Rights Movement of the 1950s and ‘60s used the Montgomery Bus Boycott (and later a boycott of segregated lunch counters) to highlight the injustice of racial segregation. Thus, boycotts are very much in keeping with the American tradition.

When a company manufactures defective products (products which not only fail to perform as advertised, but which are actually dangerous) and when that company refuses to fix said demonstrable defects, despite repeated warnings, consumer advocates have more than a right – they have a positive duty — to organize a boycott.

That’s exactly what we’re doing. The Times is manufacturing a product (news coverage) which is both defective and dangerous. By boycotting The New York Times, we are refusing to do business with a company that has no regard for us, our society or our nation.