In an article published on Monday, March 14, 2016, the New York Times gave a glowing review of Democratic nominee Bernie Sanders’s work in the Senate. That was one day before primaries in Ohio, Illinois, and Florida.
However, by Monday afternoon, after the article was shared by many including the Sanders campaign, the New York Times posted an altered version of the article giving a less-than-radiant view of the Vermont senator, as revealed by the blog The Broken Ravioli.
The article was written by veteran congressional reporter Jennifer Steinhauer, and outlined Sanders’s 25 years of strategy for passing legislation in the Senate.
The original title of the article was “Bernie Sanders Scored Victories for Years Via Legislative Side Doors,” but in the revised version it read Via Legislative Side Doors, Bernie Sanders Won Modest Victories.
The inclusion of the word “modest” reset the tone of the article, and downplayed the achievements of the Senator.
In addition to the title, the article deleted praise for Sanders by Warren Gunnels, Sanders’s longtime policy adviser, who called the Vermont Senator’s strategy for passing legislation “very successful.”
In its place are two paragraphs that read:
But in his presidential campaign Mr. Sanders is trying to scale up those kinds of proposals as a national agenda, and there is little to draw from his small-ball legislative approach to suggest that he could succeed.
Mr. Sanders is suddenly promising not just a few stars here and there, but the moon and a good part of the sun, from free college tuition paid for with giant tax hikes to a huge increase in government health care, which has made even liberal Democrats skeptical.
The rest of the alterations follow a similar pattern. Where once there was praise and positive characterization of the Senator, it was revised to reflect a more critical portrait of him.
On Jan. 30, The New York times announced that they were endorsing Hillary Clinton as the Democratic nominee saying:
“As secretary of state, Mrs. Clinton worked tirelessly, and with important successes, for the nation’s benefit. She was the secretary President Obama needed and wanted: someone who knew leaders around the world, who brought star power as well as expertise to the table.”
In that endorsement, the paper characterized Sanders as a candidate without the vision or policy that Clinton has.
“In the end, though, Mr. Sanders does not have the breadth of experience or policy ideas that Mrs. Clinton offers.”
— NYT Politics (@nytpolitics) March 14, 2016