The New York Times is experiencing backlash among its staff and readers after it held New York City mayor candidate Zohran Mamdani to account on Thursday for apparently lying on his application to Columbia University by claiming he was black.
Law professor and legal commentator Jonathan Turley wrote about the incident on his website Sunday, detailing the drama unfolding at the paper of record.
“The paper was denounced by its own staff and liberal pundits called for the entire editorial staff to be canned,” Turley wrote. “Why? Because The New York Times actually reported news that was deemed harmful to the Democrats, specifically Democratic mayoral nominee Zohran Mamdani.”
The Times’ assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust, Patrick Healy, wrote a long thread on the social media site X that stated: “When we hear anything of news value, we try to confirm it through direct sources. Mr. Mamdani confirmed this information in an interview with The Times.”
As the @nytimes assistant managing editor for Standards and Trust, I’ve received reader feedback regarding our reporting on Zohran Mamdani’s 2009 application to Columbia University. To provide context on how the reporting came together, I wanted to share some information:
— Patrick Healy (@patrickhealynyt) July 4, 2025
Healy seemed like a hostage. He rattled off 11 tweets as if he was waving his hands in the air, screaming his defense. Ultimately, he bowed to the mob.
The Times couldn’t have pulled the story. That would’ve been professional suicide. But this step-by-step explainer was the next best thing. This is not a good look for American journalism.
“For liberals, it was an utter nightmare,” Turley continued. “For a party still defined by identity politics, Mamdani’s false claim over his race left many uncertain about how to react. The left has always maintained a high degree of tolerance for false claims by its own leaders, from Sen. Elizabeth Warren claiming to be a native American to Sen. Richard Blumenthal claiming to have served in the Vietnam War.”
Turley also rightly pointed out that many people who patronize the Times are emotionally triggered. The legal scholar highlighted the “anger” felt by the far-left when this happens and compared it to how liberals on college campuses feel when opposing views are offered.
“The fact is that the Mamdani story was obvious news — and confirmed by the candidate himself,” Turley declared. “Mamdani identified as both Asian and African American on his 2009 Columbia University application, according to the New York Times.”
The Times piece stated: “Columbia, like many elite universities, used a race-conscious affirmative action admissions program at the time. Reporting that his race was Black or African American in addition to Asian could have given an advantage to Mr. Mamdani, who was born in Uganda and spent his earliest years there.”
“In an interview on Thursday, Mr. Mamdani, 33, said he did not consider himself either Black or African American, but rather ‘an American who was born in Africa,’” the story continued. “He said his answers on the college application were an attempt to represent his complex background given the limited choices before him, not to gain an upper hand in the admissions process.”
Mamdani cheated the system, and in the end, he didn’t even get accepted to Columbia. For someone who pushes “equality” at all costs, isn’t that significant? Doesn’t it prove he’s a liar, a fraud, and an opportunist?
These questions weren’t asked by Times readers. Instead, they were angered about Mamdani taking a hit as the election approaches.
This shows how mainstream media outlets have devolved into an arm of the Democratic Party. It’s sad, given how journalism is a privilege that should be held sacred.
There is always room for opinion and commentary, but when you report opinion as pure fact, and demonize any detractors, it blurs the lines of truth.
Information is delivered with rage and acts like a heat-seeking missile, aimed at anyone who gets in the way of the agenda.
The ironic part is that this fringe behavior is a big part of why President Donald Trump got elected twice. They think their political goals somehow advance if they just scream and complain louder.
Yet all they’re doing is reaffirming to voters why they chose Trump in the first place, while encouraging the public to take what the media reports with a big grain of salt.
This article appeared originally on The Western Journal.
The post New York Times Readers and Staffers Unable to Handle a Rare Brush with Objective Journalism appeared first on The Gateway Pundit.
