Share on Google Plus Share on Twitter Share on Facebook Share on LinkedIn Share on PInterest Share on Fark! Share on Reddit Share on StumbleUpon Tell A Friend 1 (1 Shares)  
Printer Friendly Page Save As Favorite View Favorites View Article Stats   1 comment

Exclusive to OpEdNews:
OpEdNews Op Eds

NY Times Prints Health Care Articles "K Street" Style

By (about the author)     Permalink       (Page 1 of 1 pages)
Related Topic(s): ; ; ; ; ; , Add Tags Add to My Group(s)

View Ratings | Rate It

opednews.com Headlined to H3 7/24/09

I had planned to publish this yesterday, but alas, I was delayed and another day adds another piece of evidence to my case.

Today, The New York Times released the latest in a series of articles on health care that slants language and propagates unsubstantiated facts to create the perception that Americans oppose fixing our broken health care system.

Today's article, "For Public, Obama Didn't Fill in Health Blanks," repeated an unsubstantiated claim that the paper made yesterday that America is growing "increasingly anxious" about a public plan option and meaningful health care reform. The article doesn't cite any poll numbers, instead, it bases its conclusions on interviews with a handful of people.

Yesterday's article, "Obama Moves to Reclaim the Debate on Health Care." made the top of the Times webpage along with this teaser: "President Obama sought to convince an increasingly skeptical American public that proposed changes to the health care system would benefit them and strengthen the economy."

"Increasingly skeptical." "Increasingly anxious." You see a pattern? The articles suggest that public sentiment is shifting in the wind; suddenly a wind-sock in the Gulf of Mexico is blowing the horrifyingly wrong direction. Barometric pressure is dropping at an alarming rate. Do you feel your pulse beginning to quicken? If so, you've been had by the same paper that rewarded Judith Miller with a massage, manicure and martini the day she got out of jail and after publishing a bunch of bogus articles about weapons of mass destruction in Iraq before the invasion.

Don't doubt the danger of this manipulation. Articles like these create a false reality that leads to an actual change in public perception. All of these Americans that the New York Times is claiming are increasingly skeptical about fixing the costs and perils of health care, read articles like this and begin to wonder if they are alone in supporting strong health care reform. Then, they decide to follow the example of their neighbors and oppose health care reform--except their neighbors were never skeptical either before reading a slew of articles like this. Works perfectly for the insurance and health care industry.

If anything, since polls released in June proved that over 75 percent of Americans support the same public plan option and radical meaningful reform supported by the "most liberal" (read, the only members of Congress not corrupted by special interest money) members of Congress, the divisions among the Republicans' supposedly core constituencies like business owners, are growing at an alarming rate for the GOP.

The Washington Post recently reported that small and medium business owners in Maine, a key battle-ground state, are strongly supportive of a strong public plan option and overhaul.

Scan through the articles on health care coming from the New York Times and a and a different reality is portrayed. The articles are written with the same overblown, gasping language one could expect to find in a trashy romance novel with a half-naked girl on the cover in the arms of a blond long-haired Favio-type with a bared chest and a billowing white button-up shirt.

In an article published last week entitled, "Governors Fear Medicaid Cost in Health Plan," the Times reported: "The governors' backlash creates yet another health care headache for the Obama administration, which has tried to recruit state leaders to pressure members of Congress to wrap up their fitful negotiations."

Notice that the "headache" is hyperlinked, so the gloom and doom drumbeat of the Times can resound on another page. The theme persists: things are falling apart for President Obama and health care reform. It is pointless for the reader to hope for reform while the world is ending.

Perfect for "K Street," the street made infamous by special interest lobbyists like the sick pathetic sellouts working for the insurance and health care industries. The health provider and insurer industries want to dash the hopes of America that they can ever rise up against the power on K Street and expect something better. We are burdened with a $2.5 trillion health care economy, it's rising toward 40 percent of our GDP, it's muzzling businesses, tearing apart families and destroying the fabric of our society, but they want you to feel hopeless.

The Times also printed this article: "Health Bill Might Direct Tax Money to Abortion." Why make this headline news? Why? Because an aide to the president wouldn't rule it out. First sentence: "An Obama administration official refused Sunday to rule out the possibility that federal tax money might be used to pay for abortions under proposed health care legislation."

If an Obama administration official failed to rule out that cows might fly someday, would the Times print an article with such a provocative headline that is clearly going to have the effect of sounding alarm bells in the anti-abortion community? "Health Bill Might Allow Cows to Fly, Prepare Your Umbrellas."

No source of information is impermeable to the influence of K Street money. Don't be fooled by the New York Times branding of liberal-bias. Insurance and health industry lobbyists would love to meet with the Times editors and lobby hard against the "liberal" (read un-corrupted) versions of health care reform under consideration in the House and Senate. The Times needs money. Lots of money. Look at the Boston Globe and the cuts the Times was forced to make there. If anything, the Times is more in need of currying favor with pharmaceutical giants, private insurers and health industry providers now than ever before.

Could the Times be cutting advertising deals with these industries a year in advance? If the paper was saturated with Blue Cross and Anthem ads right now, the conflict of interest would be apparent, but can we expect to see these types of ads explode in the paper a year from now after the Times helps to defeat health care reform? Stay tuned.

 

Dean Powers is on Facebook. Check it out on the link above and drop me a line.

Share on Google Plus Submit to Twitter Add this Page to Facebook! Share on LinkedIn Pin It! Add this Page to Fark! Submit to Reddit Submit to Stumble Upon

The views expressed in this article are the sole responsibility of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of this website or its editors.

Follow Me on Twitter

Contact Author Contact Editor View Authors' Articles

Most Popular Articles by this Author:     (View All Most Popular Articles by this Author)

XRay Naked Pics for "Officer in Remote Location"

Kate Winslett Tears Up Over Global Warming at Oscar's

"He'd better..." Grassley Snarls About Obama...Wouldn't Fly at This Redneck's Keg Party

Limbaugh Watch: Palin Pregnancy Talking Points

"Drill (Me), Baby, Drill (Me)" Sex, Drugs, Big Oil Scandal

Limbaugh, Hannity: Blame Democrats For "Free Market" Failure

Comments

The time limit for entering new comments on this article has expired.

This limit can be removed. Our paid membership program is designed to give you many benefits, such as removing this time limit. To learn more, please click here.

Comments: Expand   Shrink   Hide  
1 people are discussing this page, with 1 comments
To view all comments:
Expand Comments
(Or you can set your preferences to show all comments, always)
Well, actually, the public IS increasingly skeptic... by Scott Baker on Friday, Jul 24, 2009 at 11:34:36 AM