New York Time building. Wikimedia
New York Times: New York Post Published Hunter Biden Report Amid Newsroom Doubts
Some reporters withheld their bylines and questioned the credibility of an article that made the tabloid’s front page on Wednesday.
The New York Post’s front-page article about Hunter Biden on Wednesday was written mostly by a staff reporter who refused to put his name on it, two Post employees said.
Bruce Golding, a reporter at the Rupert Murdoch-owned tabloid since 2007, did not allow his byline to be used because he had concerns over the article’s credibility, the two Post employees said, speaking on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retaliation.
Coming late in a heated presidential campaign, the article suggested that Joseph R. Biden Jr. had used his position to enrich his son Hunter when he was vice president. The Post based the story on photos and documents the paper said it had taken from the hard drive of a laptop purportedly belonging to Hunter Biden.
Many Post staff members questioned whether the paper had done enough to verify the authenticity of the hard drive’s contents, said five people with knowledge of the tabloid’s inner workings.
Staff members also had concerns about the reliability of its sources and its timing, the people said.
Read more ....
Update: New York Times report exposes the shoddy journalism behind New York Post's Biden hit piece (Media Matters)
WNU Editor: For a New York Times post that has been widely referred to as a critical analysis on the New York Post article on the Hunter Biden's email story, I found it to be very short, and not at all convincing. It uses anonymous sources to say that there were many within the New York Post who were uncomfortable with publishing the story. If there is one thing that I have learned about anonymous sources from the New York Times, it is that they have been terribly unreliable during the Trump Presidency.
The above reporter for the NYT also discounts the New York Post suggestion that the elder Mr. Biden had met with a Burisma adviser, Vadym Pozharskyi, by quoting a Biden campaign spokesman who said that Mr. Biden’s official schedules showed no meeting between the former vice president and the adviser. OK. There is nothing on the OFFICIAL schedule. Notice the play on words. How about an unofficial meeting as Bryan York suggests and Politico confirms ....
“Biden’s campaign would not rule out the possibility that the former VP had some kind of informal interaction with Pozharskyi, which wouldn’t appear on Biden’s official schedule. But they said any encounter would have been cursory. Pozharskyi did not respond to a request for comment.” (On Hunter Biden, Remember The Real Story (Hot Air)).
But I leave the best for the last and one that the New York Times ignores. Since the breaking of this story the Biden family and their campaign have not denied any of the facts that the New York Post exclusive have revealed with the exception of calling it a smear job on Friday. Now why is that?
It’s now been four days since The Post dropped the first Hunter Files story, and neither Joe nor Hunter has disputed a single material fact.
— Sohrab Ahmari (@SohrabAhmari) October 18, 2020
The easiest thing they could do is to say, “That laptop isn’t ours, Hunter didn’t send/receive those e-mails.”
Yet they haven’t done that
