Loading the player reg...
On the December 29 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto, guest host Stuart Varney asked: "If and when Saddam [Hussein] is put to death, will The New York Times be in mourning about it?" Varney was discussing a December 29 New York Times editorial that said Saddam's trial was "flawed, politicized and divisive" and that executing him will not "automatically create a new and better Iraq." Subsequently, on the January 1 edition of Your World, Varney claimed that "it appears the paper of record is" mourning Saddam's death because "[t]oday's headline call[ed] the hanging 'a rush job.' " Varney then asked: "So, is the Times now an advocate for the Iraqi dictator?"
While Varney did not indicate which specific January 1 Times article bore a headline calling Saddam's hanging "a rush job," a January 1 Times article was headlined: "U.S. Questioned Iraq on the Rush to Hang Hussein."
The onscreen text on the December 29 edition of Your World asked "Media Bias?" while the January 1 onscreen text asked: "Mourning Saddam?"
From the December 29 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:
VARNEY: If and when Saddam is put to death, will The New York Times be in mourning about it? In an op-ed piece [in fact, it was an editorial] entitled "The Rush to Hang Saddam Hussein," editors question if the trial was legitimate and if Iraq will even be better off with him dead.
From the January 1 edition of Fox News' Your World with Neil Cavuto:
VARNEY: It began with articles last week criticizing Saddam's impending doom. That prompted us to ask on this show if The New York Times would be in mourning if Saddam was executed. Well, now it appears the paper of record is! Today's headline calling the hanging "a rush job." So, is the Times now an advocate for the Iraqi dictator?