New York Times Executives Face Fierce Investor Backlash for Anti-Semitic Cartoon

Times Publisher A.G. Sulzberger Refuses to Make Findings of Internal Investigation Available to the Public

Sulzberger Also Insults Conservative Shareholder, Claims He is Pushing “Conspiracies”

New York, NY/Washington, D.C. – In the face of angry investors who recounted decades of anti-Semitic coverage in the New York Times, the Gray Lady’s executives declared that they will not make the findings of an internal investigation public – and went on to insult the conservative investor who dared to question them about the paper’s biases.

When confronted about last week’s cartoon depicting President Trump being blindly led by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was portrayed as a dog, Times Publisher A.G. Sulzberger claimed that the situation was an internal personnel matter and would be dealt with away from public view. His answer came in response to a question from Free Enterprise Project Director Justin Danhof, Esq., at today’s annual meeting of New York Times shareholders held in the Times’s Manhattan offices. Sulzberger went on to repeatedly insult Danhof by claiming that he was peddling in conspiracies and by suggesting that Danhof wouldn’t be interested in an “honest” answer.

Justin Danhof

Justin Danhof, Esq.

“The smug condescension that was directed at me by Mr. Sulzberger was palpable, but not surprising. Times writers and editors live and operate in such an extreme liberal bubble, filled with animosity toward conservatives and conservative thought, that simply hearing one conservative question per year is enough to cause such petulance,” said Danhof. “The fact that the paper refuses to make public the results of the internal investigation into the cartoon and the company’s biases is insulting. These events occurred in public view, and thus the public should be allowed to see whether and how the paper is going to respond.”

At the meeting, Danhof stated:

Consider that in 2015, the Times’s support for then-President Obama’s plan to funnel billions of dollars to Iran went so far as to create a “list” of Jewish lawmakers who opposed the bill and then targeting those who represented highly-populated Jewish districts for even more scrutiny. The Times pulled the clearly anti-Semitic list after fierce backlash.

Then last week, the Times published an insanely anti-Semitic cartoon featuring President Trump and Prime Minister Netanyahu in nearly the exact same manner that ACTUAL NAZI propaganda was deployed against Winston Churchill. And initially, you wouldn’t even apologize for it.

The Times’s seething hatred of President Trump and his family is further evidence of a culture that breeds hostility. The Times spent two years perpetuating – and in fact creating – the hoax that the President and his team worked with the Russians to steal the election from the candidate whom you had endorsed. That’s not journalism, and many, including the President, have suggested that you should return the Pulitzer that you won for covering this hoax.

Danhof concluded:

First, the Times is a paper by liberals for liberals. Everyone knows that.

Second, the Times has fostered a culture that is so viscerally anti-conservative, anti-white and anti-Semitic that last week’s wildly anti-Semitic cartoon was not a mere oversight; it was inevitable. It was a reflection of the Times’s ethos.

In light of this, I have a few quick questions… Will you make the results of your internal investigation into the cartoon available to the public, including any persons who are being fired or disciplined and what structural changes the paper will make? And will you make all of the underlying documents and communications of the investigation public including the announced bias review you are going to undertake?

Danhof’s entire question, as prepared for delivery, can be read here.

“Sulzberger’s very first response to my question was to impugn my character by suggesting that I wouldn’t be interested in his honest response, but he was going to graciously offer it to me anyway. He then charged me with peddling in ‘conspiracies’ without stating what part of my question he was referencing. That’s no way to treat a company shareholder,” said Danhof. “If the Times were to drop its extreme anti-conservative and anti-Semitic bias, that would actually open the paper up to a much broader potential customer base. That would be a good thing for the Times’s bottom line! However, Sulzberger and his cronies seem happy to condescend to conservatives and unwilling to listen to honest criticism. While he is in charge, expect the bias and barrage of fake news to persist as he continues to look down his nose at conservatives.”

Two other shareholders also mentioned the cartoon and the Times’s long history of anti-Semitism. In response to a serious question about why the Times regularly smears Israelis as “occupiers,” a characterization akin to Nazism, the leadership team made no indication that it would stop that practice.

“The pomposity could have been served in a punch bowl this morning. The self-genuflection of Times employees patting themselves on the back – largely for their efforts to derail the Trump Administration – was so off-putting, but it speaks volumes to the self-importance that Times staffers feel,” added Danhof. “If a conservative ever wants to be insulted and offended, I highly recommend attending a New York Times shareholder meeting.”

Today’s New York Times meeting marks the twelfth time FEP has participated in a shareholder meeting in 2019.

To schedule an interview, contact National Center’s Director of Media Judy Kent at (703) 759-0269.

Support our efforts. Click this image to help FEP stand up to liberal media bullies.

Launched in 2007, the National Center’s Free Enterprise Project focuses on shareholder activism and the confluence of big government and big business. Over the past four years alone, FEP representatives have participated in over 100 shareholder meetings – advancing free-market ideals about health care, energy, taxes, subsidies, regulations, religious freedom, food policies, media bias, gun rights, workers’ rights and other important public policy issues. As the leading voice for conservative-minded investors, FEP annually files more than 90 percent of all right-of-center shareholder resolutions. Dozens of liberal organizations, however, annually file more than 95 percent of all policy-oriented shareholder resolutions and continue to exert undue influence over corporate America.

FEP activity has been covered by media outlets including the New York Times, Washington Post, USA Today, Variety, the Associated Press, Bloomberg, Drudge Report, Business Insider, National Public Radio and SiriusXM. FEP’s work was prominently featured in Wall Street Journal writer Kimberley Strassel’s 2016 book The Intimidation Game: How the Left is Silencing Free Speech (Hachette Book Group).

Earlier this year, Investor’s Business Daily published an op-ed by Danhof regarding the capitulation of Amazon, Facebook and Alphabet to liberal diversity pushers. It is available here.

The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations and less than two percent from corporations. It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 60,000 active recent contributors. Contributions are tax-deductible and may be earmarked for the Free Enterprise Project. Sign up for email updates here.

Follow us on Twitter at @NationalCenter and @FreeEntProject for general announcements. To be alerted to upcoming media appearances by National Center staff, follow our media appearances Twitter account at @NCPPRMedia.

-30-



The National Center for Public Policy Research, founded in 1982, is a non-partisan, free-market, independent conservative think-tank. Ninety-four percent of its support comes from individuals, less than four percent from foundations and less than two percent from corporations. It receives over 350,000 individual contributions a year from over 60,000 active recent contributors.