This study is a classic example of how Leftists are out of touch with reality: “Headlines from recent NYT articles reinforce the report’s claims. Here are a few, from February 14-18: Sexual Misery and Islam; Iran’s Zarif Tells European Lawmakers Islamist Militancy Also Their Problem; Bangladesh Arrests Publisher for Books Said to Hurt Muslims; Trial Starts in Attack at Exhibit of Anti-Islam Cartoons. These all classify as negative according to the report’s scoring system….These articles, combined with the overwhelmingly negative sentiment of headlines, make the New York Times complicit in normalizing inflammatory rhetoric regarding Islam and Muslims.”
So the New York Times is “Islamophobic” and is “normalizing inflammatory rhetoric regarding Islam and Muslims” because it reported on the trial of a jihadi who plotted to attack our Garland free speech event; and on censorship of books to which Muslims objected in Bangladesh; and on the Foreign Minister of Iran, who is a Muslim, talking about “Islamist militancy,” which is obviously a problem by whatever name it may be called, and has an undoubtedly Islamic character based on the statements and behavior of jihadis themselves; and on the oppression of women under Islamic law — another obvious problem.
Thus if Muslims would stop committing jihad attacks, censoring dissent, and oppressing women, New York Times coverage of Islam would substantially improve. The New York Times is actually quite solicitous of Islam and routinely downplays and whitewashes the Islamic character of jihad violence and Sharia oppression; but as far as these Leftist “scholars” are concerned, the only thing that would clear the Grey Lady of charges of “Islamophobia” would be for it to ignore jihad news altogether, or scrupulously make sure its jihad coverage was balanced by a sufficient number of puff pieces showing gentle Muslims doing beautiful things. Does any other group get such treatment? We hear so much about supposed “right-wing extremist” violence nowadays; would the 416 Labs or AlterNet demand that the New York Times balance its coverage of that alleged threat with puff pieces about sweet, cuddly white supremacists?
The insidious agenda here is to silence even the slightest (and the New York Times is about as slight as you can get) critical word about anything related to Islam and Muslims. This would have the effect of silencing all opposition to the advancing jihad. It would be a recipe for defeat and surrender.
“NY Times Portrays Islam More Negatively Than Cancer, Major Study Finds,” by Davide Mastracci, AlterNet, February 29, 2016:
The November 2015 416 Labs report states that there is a “significant bias” against Islam and Muslims in the New York Times that is likely to lead the average reader to “assign collective responsibility to Islam/Muslims for the violent actions of a few.”
“When we went into it we didn’t think it would be surprising if Islam was one of the most negatively portrayed topics in the NYT,” says co-author Usaid Siddiqui. “What did really surprise us was that compared with something as inherently negative as cancer, Islam still tends to be more negative.”
Islam was portrayed negatively in 57 percent of headlines during the period of analysis, with cancer and cocaine being evaluated at 34 and 47 percent respectively. Islam was portrayed positively in less than half the headlines as cancer.
Christianity and Judaism, meanwhile, were portrayed negatively in 37 and 34 percent of headlines, 20 or more percent less than Islam.
Islam was mentioned in 5.4 headlines per day in 2014, nearly a 1,000 percent rise from 2013, likely due to ISIL. The percentage of negative headlines regarding Islam and Muslims also jumped in 2014, to 68 percent from 35 percent in 2009.
The negative portrayal of Islam is not new, according to the report, as the percent of negative headlines regarding Islam exceeded the overall average in the NYT in every year measured. The report’s findings offer qualitative proof of something many Muslims have long suspected, says co-author Owais Arshad, who disseminated the findings to several prominent Muslim groups, such as the Council on American-Islamic Relations.
“Over time it just became too rampant to ignore,” Arshad says. “Among the Muslim friends I have, there’s been a distinct recognition that the media is a source of information, but a source of biased information.”
The report references its findings as proof that bias against Muslims is not limited to conservatives, noting that, “While the liberal media has been more nuanced in its portrayal, it has ultimately adhered to the same convention that portrays Muslims as the ‘other.'”
The researchers analyzed over 2.6 million NYT print and digital headlines, spanning from 1990 to 2014. Headlines were categorized as positive, negative or neutral using sentiment analysis, a procedure where the sentiment of a combination of words is judged by attributing a value to the words based on a dictionary list.
The 416 Labs report used a list of over 7,200 words compiled in 2012, in addition to a violence vocabulary word list, to tailor a unique collection of words to measure the headlines. The report cites an example of how this analysis works, noting that “stock market plunge causes devastating loss and panic” is a notably more negative headline than “stock index decreases as a result of market correction,” despite addressing the same subject. The Times was selected for the study because it provides its data for free, via the Article Search API protocol, unlike other media outlets, and is deemed by many to be a “paper of record,” according to the report.
Headlines from recent NYT articles reinforce the report’s claims. Here are a few, from February 14-18: Sexual Misery and Islam; Iran’s Zarif Tells European Lawmakers Islamist Militancy Also Their Problem; Bangladesh Arrests Publisher for Books Said to Hurt Muslims; Trial Starts in Attack at Exhibit of Anti-Islam Cartoons. These all classify as negative according to the report’s scoring system.
The co-authors do not believe the newspape [sic] intentionally portrays Islam negatively. Still, the report notes that the effect of “such language does promote the idea that Islam and its adherents are culpable for the violent actions of a few,” a frustrating reality for the co-authors.
“How can you say that war, and violence and terror are the summation of the Muslim experience?” Arshad asks, noting Islamic art, music and literature have been ignored. “A very complex living culture that extends from Indonesia all the way to Morocco, and within the West itself, has been reduced to a very small slice.”
The media bias against Islam has serious consequences, according to the report, which states that, “The current conflicts and security policies adopted by Western countries in the war on terror are often justified by citing the threats posed by Islamist militants and jihadist forces.” The report found that the word “militant” is among the top five words associated with Islam and Muslims, with the other four being neutral terms such as “state.” None of the top 25 words associated with Islam and Muslims were positive.
Headlines regarding Islam and Muslims are just one part of the problem, however, as there are countless articles discussing Islam/Muslims in a negative manner without using either term in the headline. Moreover, these headlines are occasionally reinforced by explicitly Islamophobic articles….
These articles, combined with the overwhelmingly negative sentiment of headlines, make the New York Times complicit in normalizing inflammatory rhetoric regarding Islam and Muslims. This discourse has contributed to an upswing in Islamophobic incidents, according to prominent figures in American Muslim communities, which should serve as an imperative for the NYT to seriously reconsider how it reports on Muslims.
The report suggests that one way to combat the bias is to hire Muslim reporters, opinion writers and editors. On this front, the Times is clearly failing. The publication has no Muslim columnists, editorial board members or news editors. Andrea Elliot, who covered Muslims in post-9/11 America until 2013, is not Muslim. Since then, very few, if any of the reporters covering Muslim American issues are actually Muslim….

Champ says
Islam was portrayed negatively …
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
In other words: Truthfully.
Huck Folder says
Champ et al:
Umm. I’m not a statistician but I smell a whole mosqueful of rats here.
First of all, everything but EVERYTHING comes down to language.
WHAT is a headline? Is it the banner across the front page in 72pt
type or even larger? Or is it the slightly larger or boldface text above
even the smallest paragraph, in the gutter, on the last page?
There are about 150 entries in the index for today’s (Mar 01, 2016) NYT.
So if they publish 360 days per year, for 25 years, that’s 1,350,000 headlines.
Somehow I don’t think that index includes every little stand-alone paragraph.
Maybe the other 1.25 million ‘headlines’ were from the online version?
Or maybe there were 3-400 headlines per issue in 1990?
What is the credibility of the “sentiment analysis”? It sounds like an
Ayers/Dohrn/Alinski make work project, akin to “micro-aggressions”.
The last entry of the summary:
http://416labs.com/nytandislam
is “Volume of mentions as a percentage of
total articles for Islam/Muslims.” which they say
has INCREASED by 700% since 1990,
and OVER 300% since 2012.
WOW! That’s over 1000% increase!
Well, actually no, the second figure is included in the first!
So there has been an increase of 700% in 25 years.
But look at the ACTUAL figures, they go from 0.1% in 1990,
or JUST ONE IN ONE THOUSAND, to seven in 1,000 in 2014.
Look again. there is a gentle rise in AVERAGE level,
from about 0.1% in 1990 to about 0.2% in 2013,
hardly dramatic, and maybe less than the rise in
mohammedan population over the same period.
So, only the last year of that study shows the
300-350% jump. It would be interesting to plot
major LESSER JIHAD atrocities on the same graph,
or rate of LESSER JIHAD attacks
(by day/week/month whatever)
to see what correlation there is.
Lastly, for now, look at the full verbose
(30 page) pseudo-intellectual study here:
http://static1.squarespace.com/static/558067a3e4b0cb2f81614c38/t/564d7b91e4b082df3a4e291e/1447918481058/nytandislam_study.pdf
[Intro]
“For the Muslim community 2015 was a year marked by unusually VITRIOLIC acts of ‘islamophobia’.
[Like the ‘vitriolic’ attacks of 9/ll, Beslan, Bali, Paris…] Whether it was the detention of a TALENTED 14 year old student, Ahmed [clockboy] Mohamed, on suspicion of inventing a bomb (it was a [repackaged] clock), or the anti-Muslim rhetoric espoused by Republican presidential candidates in the recent debates, Muslims were repeatedly portrayed, collectively, as being worthy of suspicion, distrust, and at best as reservoirs of latent violence ‘ever ready to unleash havoc’. [Citation?] This portrayal peaked with the horrific attacks in Paris on November 13th 2015, where over a 150 people were ‘killed’. [MURDERED BY JIHADISTS] The INSTANT * reaction from many was to blame Muslims, within just a few hours of the attacks. [Citation?] Two CNN anchors discussing the horrific attacks asserted to their Muslim guest that “accept that responsibility to prevent the bigger backlash”. According to them the “finger of blame is pointing at the Muslim community.”
Well, they certainly weren’t Jews, Hindus, Christians…
* There were quotes of witnesses hearing the Shinto war cry
allahu akbar fairly early on, and mohammedanism
seems to have a monopoly on suicide bombers.
“The Mirror” timeline doesn’t mention islam or moslems!
They say that “ISIS” claimed responsibility
at 9:40 am, the next day.
“Acknowledgments [The guilty parties]
We would like to thank Karine Walther,
Professor at Georgetown University
at the Doha campus in Qatar,
whose feedback was exceptionally helpful
in CRAFTING [He, he!] this paper.
We are also grateful to Imraan Siddiqi
of the Council of American Islamic Relations
(CAIR) – Arizona, Corey Saylor of CAIR Washington D.C
and Hassan Shibly’s [sic are there more than one of them?]
of CAIR Florida for their generous advice and friendship
throughout this process.
Naheed Mustafa, a ‘renowned’ [?] Canadian journalist,
provided us with comments and criticism that were crucial
in helping us strengthen our paper further.
So there it is, a cair fabrication, funded by sods and s0r0s.
mortimer says
Good research from HF. What can we conclude about the last thirty years in Islamism? What security-intelligence has concluded:That there’s an increase in jihad-terrorism.
The icing on the cake of Muslim terrorism last year was the attack on a Christmas-time office party in San Bernardino.
Christians and Jews in the West are no longer safe at their place of work from Muslims they work with.
Dacritic says
Er…and here I was thinking the NYT is leftist and hence pro-Islam? Oh, do forgive me.
mortimer says
Concurring with Dacritic. Since NYT is leftist and goes easy on Islam news, HOW MUCH MORE BAD NEWS ABOUT ISLAM do they refuse to print?
The answer to those who have been following the issues is that NYT does ignore a lot of bad news about Islam and mostly prints the ‘big stuff’ that everyone will expect. It’s been noticeable that they’ve often left out the ‘brand’ of terrorists or honor-murders or revenge killers. NYT often seems to say: “Oh! What could their motivation possibly be? We cannot know!” If a Baptist preacher commits a crime, he will be identified as Baptist, but a Muslim will often not be identified as such.
Far from going hard on Muslims, the NYT, to many of us, appears to avoid linking crimes to Islam, but rather they whitewash Islam of responsibility most of the time.
jihad3tracker says
WHEN 10 SPARE MINUTES APPEAR, FIND A CONTACT PATH TO THESE TWO SCHLUBS — SIDDIQUI AND ARSHAD — AND “EDUCATE” THEM, AS POLITELY AS POSSIBLE EVEN THOUGH YOU ARE WRITING TO APPARENT MORONS.
ICH says
SERIOUSLY !!!?
New York Times
hahahahahahhahaa
as if
Diana says
What kind of newspaper is 66% positive about cancer?
Oliver says
Diana- in answer– (only one I can think of) A MEDICAL JOURNAL WHEN REPORTING ON POSSIBLE BREAKTHROUGHS IN THE TREATMENT (OF ONE OR MORE) TYPES OF THE DISEASE.
(I say Medical Journal, because the articles would be, to a layman, probably gibberish, with all of the medical and Latin terminology).
So, a Medical Journal could have a 66% FAVORABLE item-as to that ( as an example) Treatment Y was successful in Z% of the participants in a clinical study using Drug X3 combined with Drug Q 17.
Of course, that is UNFAVORABLE to the disease, as it means that a potential cure could be found.
No cure, or doubtful, anyhow, for Islam as it stands. My view ( and that of others here)
mortimer says
Reporting bad news doesn’t make most perpetrators or their families happy. Who wants to hear how many mass killings your uncle committed if your family name is Hitler? Or if you are German? Does being related make you a criminal? No, but let’s skip facts.
Reporting is about reporting facts, rather than making up stuff that is more comforting, soft-pedaling the news or white-washing the news.
Muslims have their own version of ‘slander’…saying anything that doesn’t flatter a Muslim even if true. Islam is an ‘honor’ culture in which saying ‘Ahmed snores louder than a lawn blower’ is considered ‘slander’, even if you can prove it with sound analysis.
Muslims are supremacists and they will not be happy until there is no bad news about Muslims, but only bad news about all other groups while Muslim news is whitewashed, soft-pedaled and softened out of existence…also known as censorship.
The US has a free press, Muslims. Listen to it or go to Berzerkistan where no one hears any news except about how bad the Americans and Jews are.
gravenimage says
Mortimer wrote:
Muslims have their own version of ‘slander’…saying anything that doesn’t flatter a Muslim even if true.
………………….
*Very* important point, Mortimer.
Under Shari’ah, no Infidel is allowed to say anything negative about Islam–or even about any Muslim.
Hope says
I see the NY Times every day in the break room where I work. I can guarantee this paper is the ultimate Islamic ass-kissing rag, shamefully so. They are Palestinian sympathizers who bash Israel every chance they get. They champion the “plight” of so-called Syrian refugees, and imply that Western “imperialism” is partly to blame for jihad attacks. Regarding the Islamic invasion of Europe, they are blatantly pro-migrant. It is sickening. Give me a break!
peter11937 says
The NYT deeds to change to the ISLAMIC ass KICKING champion. Pass that on to the NYT Editorial board.
celticwarriorcanada says
Can anyone” Blame” The Times FOR THIS ! What the hell Good Things are they suppose To Report ? Maybe they could write an Article On How ISLAM INFLUENCED THE FOUNDING FATHERS ( LOL ) ! Or How Islam Contributed to THE ABOLITION Of SLAVERY ( think I’ll Puke!) ! Either way ? THEY WOULD HAVE TO ( like The Administration) MAKE UP SOME B.S. STORY ! OR REVISION OF HISTORY !!!”
miriamrove says
” says co-author Usaid Siddiqui…
The co author’s name says it all. m
berserker says
The other is one, co-author Owais Arshad, is also a Muslim name.
gravenimage says
Usaid Siddiq worked for Aljazeera America before it went belly up. He has indeed written about terrorists–but they were Buddhist “terrorists” in Burma. He has slammed Atheists like Sam Harris for their supposed violence against Muslims–something sane people might have missed, since Sam Harris is not violent, nor has he ever advocated violence.
Owais Arshad has laughably claimed that human rights in Pakistan have been trampled not by Islam but by the war on terror. He is virulently anti-India. He has bizarrely characterized the brutal horror of Shari’ah law as “reasoning with God”.
The *only* thing I can see that he has written negatively about Jihad terror groups is a critique of the Taliban’s finances.
Is it any wonder that this pair would consider the dhimmi NYT insufficiently Islamophilic for just occasionally reporting the news?
mortimer says
I am reminded of a story that Napoleon, Hitler and Stalin were invited by Krushchev to see May Day parades In Red Square. Hitler and Stalin said, ‘With nuclear weapons like these, we could have conquered the world.’ Napoleon said, ‘With newspapers like Izvestia and Pravda, no one would have heard of Waterloo!’
The Muslim Leftist Usaid Siddiqui seems to want NYT to be like the old Pravda.
Jaladhi says
Basically, NYTimes is Pravda and Izvestia of our time when reporting news about Democrats and the present administration. They do the same for Muslims also, its just that Siddiqui wants even more favorable treatment for them no matter what!
Oliver says
Jaladhi,
JUST BECAUSE the NYT LAST ENDORSED A REPUBLICAN was in the 1930’s doesn’t mean that they are in bed with the Demorats, does it?
(Note, a WSJ blog some months ago had that bit of trivia).
They are Anti-semitic, in my view also Anri-US.
true liberturds.
By the way, a few years ago, to stay (more or less) afloat, they had to sell their building to Mr. Slim of Mexico, then lease it back from him. What I read (as best I remember it)- they were running out of cash; and banks were reluctant to keep financing them, as they were bleeding red ink (maybe will soon go broke–hopefully) with declining readership and advertising revenues.
They also sold some of their subsidiaries and investments.
DFD says
mortimer says: “…The Muslim Leftist Usaid Siddiqui seems to want NYT to be like the old Pravda.”
It isn’t?
Jaladhi says
Typical Muslim whining without any basis. So, reporting the factual news about Muslim terrorism is more negative than cancer. What a comparison between Muslim and cancer. Then on second thought Muslims and Islam are cancer to human society, so no wonder Muslims are crying foul! Cancer is coming out better than them! Ha, ha,..Muslims are allergic to truth about Islam. Period. They will lie to no end to prove their fallacious point, and succeed in fooling many people at a time but times are coming when no body will believe them. Liars!
Lee says
Cancer isn’t intentional. No one goes looking for cancer. Islam, or rather its adherents, go out in search of victims to kill, rape, capture and destroy. Cancer is a disease. Islam is base, prole, vulgar, deceptive, evil, wicked, practiced by people who live in complete darkness of their souls and depravity of their minds.
Mo says
@ Lee
“Cancer isn’t intentional. No one goes looking for cancer. Islam, or rather its adherents, go out in search of victims to kill, rape, capture and destroy. Cancer is a disease. Islam is base, prole, vulgar, deceptive, evil, wicked, practiced by people who live in complete darkness of their souls and depravity of their minds.”
Absolutely right. Well stated.
To continue the comparison, no one criticizes people when they fight their cancer through treatment. In fact, such people are encouraged in this fight for their lives.
But if anyone fights for their lives against Islam – even if it’s “only” speaking truthfully about it – they are called names, condemned and even silenced!
EmHotep says
Yes yes yes, we are trying to say this, look at my country Turkey, they started with 10% of the votes and now %50. Radicals, sharia lovers and they hate everything about humanity.. Stop Turkey and Saudi the rest of them will fall..
(we are putting our life in danger to inform everybody, I hope people will understand the danger)
WorkingClassPost says
If you’re writing from Turkey, be very careful, we know that there are many more of you waiting for the right time to show yourselves, so there’s no need to take unnecessary risks, please.
Erdogan tries to monitor everything.
EmHotep says
Thank you very much, we are trying to work for a peaceful earth, at least for the rest of humanity. My country was a beautiful place once, a pearl between Europe and Asia, now we stuck with jihadists. Maybe in time after Mr. Obama and Erdogan (muslim brothers) everybody will have a less sharia and more democracy.
All the Best.
gravenimage says
Thank you, EmHotep. Be safe.
DFD says
Brave man or woman, my compliments! You are the definition of what Kennedy called: Civil Courage.
EmHotep says
Thank you very much DFD. We will never give up our freedom against sharia-jihadists. I hope the sane people of world understand that democracy and islam are just the opposite of each other. Islamists always say democracy and when they have enough power they diminish democracy and bring mohammed’s rules.. This is the game for last 1400 years.
All the Best.
Islam :- the religion of horror says
Andrea Elliot, who covered Muslims in post-9/11 America until 2013, is not Muslim. Since then, very few, if any of the reporters covering Muslim American issues are actually Muslim….
I can see the headline now “Christian pilots fly Airliners into New York Trade Centre, killing prominent Islamic diplomatic leader”
mortimer says
Muslim Leftist Usaid Siddiqui just claimed that NYT is not ‘accurate’.
The NYT lawyers may be interested in asking him for an apology.
Carlos Danger says
You can cure some types of cancers.
pdxnag says
Just as medical researchers induce cancer in lab rats? Promote Islam among people? (snarc)
abad says
Muslims portray Islam negatively.
mortimer says
abad wrote: “Muslims portray Islam negatively”
Yes, Muslims portray Islam negatively…when they imitate Mohammed.
Angemon says
Meanwhile, cancer’s attorney just said the press “look, enough is enough. My client has enough of a bad reputation as it is without being compared to islam. Do you have any idea of the irreparable damage this comparison has caused, and will continue to cause, to my client? It’s guilt by association, and it paints my client in a completely unfair, surreal fashion. If you don’t want to get lung or throat cancer, don’t smoke, but what if you don’t want to get killed by a muslim waging jihad for allah? What can you do about it? Or course we’re going to sue”.
Panmelia says
Didn’t think anyone could get a laugh out of cancer or islam, but you’ve proved me wrong, Angemon!
gravenimage says
Grimly hilarious, Angemon!
Doug Purdie says
No publication should be held responsible for how its reader misinterpret its articles.
bobbi bunni says
The lame stream media tell the truth? Even their taqiyya are lies.
Davej says
Cancer is a disease that affects only individuals and is often caused by bad genes, smoking, poor diet and toxic exposures. It is also treatable, to a degree.
Islam is a bizarre organization of people who preach and carry out wholesale murder, rape and enslavement and wish to take over your country for their own purposes because their one book tells them to. And they all read the same one book.
There appears to be no successful treatment and this plague is spreading into our schools and communities. Oddly, with the enthusiastic support of our present Government, which is also, please note, our national Doctor.
Cancer seems relatively benign by comparison.
Ciudadano says
They can not conclude there is a general bias against islam just counting negative words in headlines, for that, their methodology has to consider the article content and accuracy.
“report suggests that one way to combat the bias is to hire Muslim reporters, opinion writers and editors”
Their assumption is that only Muslim reporters are unbiased towards Islam. Very hard to sell. According to that logic you will have to hire Catholics to write news about Catholic church, black reporters to write news about black people, democrat reporters to write news about Democrat party. Silly.
Oliver says
All or most of the writers/ reporters (?) etc on the NY Rag, I mena Times, most likely are Democrats.
As an example of their biases-go back to the 2008 McCain/Obama race.
THE DAY OF OR THE DAY BEFORE-(I forgot which) McCain got the nomination, the NYRag ran a FRONT PAGE STORY- McCain and a female lobbyist had an affair. NEVER MIND A FEW FACTS:
1. IT ( THE AFFAIR) AS PER BOTH OF THEM-NEVER HAPPENED.
2. IT ( THE STORY) REHASHED SOMETHING THAT HAPPENED YEARS BEFORE-ABOUT 10 IF I REMEMBER CORRECTLY.\
What had happened- as per both of them, and others–McCain and said lobbyist had dinner.
McCain-after the meal-walked her outside-where the doorman (THEY DID NOT GO TO MCDONALD’S OR BURGER KING) hailed a taxi for the lady.
McCain helped her into the cab.
The cab drove off.
That was Mr. McCain’s version, AND CONFIRMED AT THE TIME, BY THE DOORMAN.
Yet they printed this–PAGE 1; somewhere near the end of the story-mentioned in passing, when this took place.
Never retracted.
When McCain wanted to write an Op-Ed and or have a letter printed denying this-he was refused.
davej says
In general I see many more positive media reports (HuffPO hello?) than negative (realistic) stories.
“Islamophobia ” is apparently more rampant and dangerous than Islam itself.
Or so they would have you believe.
billybob says
I’ve noticed serious bias in other areas by the NYT, so I’m not surprise at all. Every time they do a story on criminals, it almost always about the crime, often with sensational details. They never give these criminals a break. How often do you ever read a story about a criminal that does volunteer work for his community, or who takes loving care of his aged mother, or even about their hobbies in prison? Some of these guys are artists and poets even! Instead we get unflattering mug shots, pictures of them behind bars, pictures of them handcuffed… Always the same distorting negative portrayals! They treat these guys like common criminals instead of American citizens who are just as much a part of our society as anybody else (well, at least before they get caught and put in jail, anyhow). Somebody should take the NYT to task about this obviously biased reporting.
Panmelia says
Love the satire.
gravenimage says
Brilliant!
Duck says
Islam is a societal cancer.
Concerned Christian says
It’s the only religion that markets itself through sexual deviance which is rewarded with even more sexual deviance with their promise of 72 virgins and little boys.
It’s the fastest growing religion in the world.
It tells us the sheer amount shameless, irredeemable perverts in the world.
Why is there a growing number of apologists and governments in the world trying to protect such a religion?
Islam :- the religion of leaching says
The only reason why it’s the fastest growing religion in the world is because each woman is having 8.5 children, compared to the rest of us that are trying to sustain the population by having less than 2.5 ….
The muslim population growth is exponential
medaber_emet says
Islam is much more negative than cancer
a country infected by islam is like a human with Metastatic malignant cancer
that also have Alzheimer and hemophilia and HIV positive
unless the western world will acknowledge that islam and all its organizations
like CAIR isna whatever are the enemy and should be ban
you will let islam take over
Jay Boo says
Islam is more negative than cancer.
Good reporting
rod sexton says
Islam is a cancer.
dragaozao says
Portraied worse than cancer? Well, maybe a new study could prove Islam kills more than cancer… just as comunism did.
islam :- the religion of leaching says
That’s understandable ….
1.3 billion people don’t have physical cancer ….
1.3 Billion people are a cancer on the rest of the world
WorkingClassPost says
This story is more tosh upon tosh.
What positive news is there about cancer? Surely only of it’s being conquered, eradicated, cured etc. so will that also qualify as positive news about islam too? Absolutely it will.
And if the incidence of negative news about islam is on the increase, is that not purely as a result of more negative actions by islamics over recent years – born out by the facts – approaching 28,000 deadly attacks courtesy http://www.thereligionofpeace.com/
BC says
Interesting the chose cancer as the comparison but childish non the less. Thre are many different types of cancer and most of them have a good recovery rate. However people do not recover from Islam as the only exit from Islam is death
gravenimage says
They certainly couldn’t compare Islam to any other human ideology…
BC says
Sorry for typo they not the
vcragain says
I believe most normal people do not have time to consider who/what/where in their thinking about the doings of the day, and only want a quiet life, they have bathrooms to clean, piles of laundry to do, crying babies to soothe, grannies to shop for etc, etc, etc.. The West has been threatened by the cult of Islam for the past 15 years or so and we are now Islamic-wary in our normal attitude to other people around us. Is this surprising ? what amount of terrorism and hate are we supposed to tolerate before our antennae get switched to “watch-out” level ? The West in general does not trust Islam, individual Muslims are not necessarily regarded as ‘bad’ unless their behavior suggests so, but we ARE suspicious of anything & everyone associated with this cult, and it is not rooted in anything but caution and instinct for survival rather than an obnoxious hate for anything different to our own social norms. The Muslim community did not speak out against any of their own’s extremism until very recently, and everyone noticed that !
This cult is a whole life-style NOT just a set of religious beliefs and because of that, represents an actual threat to the Western way of life, so Muslims do NOT be surprised if we do not regard your belief system with a welcoming heart – your belief system IS a threat to the West. Once that fact becomes recognized by the mainstream there will be a problem, which is why the media & government are trying so hard to stop ordinary folks from getting ‘upset’ – they have to try & ‘nip it in the bud’ before it causes them a problem since nervous people do rash things and make demands they may not be able to contain. I am not a nervous person about to do something nasty to anyone else (fyi ‘flaggers’) and I am certainly not trying to get others riled up, but we do have to protect ourselves from others who are attempting to coerce us into their perceived ‘correct’ way of life. .
billybob says
I liked your piece – straight from the heart.
On “The Muslim community did not speak out against any of their own’s extremism until very recently, and everyone noticed that!” I wanted to add that even their “speaking out” against extremism remains unconvincing because the problem is not just the extremists like ISIS and Al Qaeda. The problem is mainstream Islam as it is practise in every Muslim majority country in the world.
The problem is: multiple wives, FGM, death for apostasy, whippings and death for blasphemy, stoning (the woman) for adultery, forced marriages, child marriages, misogyny, hijabs, burkas, apartheid culture, madrases, zukata financing terrorism, the Muslim Brotherhood and their stealth jihad, and I am sure I am missing a dozen other things. To speak out against ISIS and remain deafeningly silent about all these other issues does not give them any appearance of sincerity at all.
gravenimage says
And most of the Muslim “speaking out” about Jihad terrorism itself is pretty equivocal–as when they equally condemn the West’s attempting to *defend* herself against Jihad terror as a form of “terrorism”.
This verbal sleight of hand, in fact, is quite common.
Panmelia says
vcragain, you have hit the nail on the head and expressed it so well.
Most of us would rather not have to concern ourselves with a belief system we find so repugnant. If they stayed in their own countries, we’d feel sorry for the women and children under such an oppressive religion, but it would be their business.
However, if they CHOOSE to live in a Western democracy for whatever reason, they cannot have it both ways – a better life AND sticking to perverse mediaeval sharia laws and cultural practices. If islamics are killing people all over the world, they cannot expect us to regard their religion with anything but suspicion and dislike.
Like you, I do not wish to harm any individual, but neither do I wish to be accused of ‘islamophobia’ (ridiculous term) for warning about a real threat.
It’s worth remembering that in the 1930’s, critics of the nazis who warned of hitler’s ambitions for world domination were denounced as ‘scaremongers’, ‘warmongers’, ‘alarmists’, and the equivalent of ‘Germanophobes’. Sir Winston Churchill received such abuse until they realised he’d been right all along.
Warm greetings from England.
gravenimage says
All true, Panmelia.
Smiling jack says
Islam is a cancer on humanity.
DFD says
Quote: “What did really surprise us was that compared with something as inherently negative as cancer, Islam still tends to be more negative.”
Well, it is! Obviously. At least, some cancers can be cured. Islam is incurable, and yes, that means Muslims are incurable.
Unless of course, the leave Islam, thus they will, and have, cured themselves.
Florida Jim says
I do not believe that for one moment if there is some way to denigrate America the New York times will do so.
mortimer says
In the jihad report for the last 30 days there were:
Attacks 123
Killed 1418
Injured 1626
Suicide Blasts 24
Countries 19
Imagine if the NYT reported every jihad attack in detail… every day of the year? In a year, there would be about 1500 jihad attacks (4 jihad stories per day); 17,000 jihad deaths; 19,500 jihad casualties; and 228 jihad suicide blasts. I’m guessing that NYT covers less than 10% of the 1500 jihad attacks each year or less than 150.
I’d call that going easy on Islam.
gravenimage says
“Study” claims that the New York Times portrays Islam more negatively than cancer
…………………………
This might be true if by “cancer”: they are referring to the zodiac symbol…
The fact is that the New York Times regularly whitewashes Islam.
But what 416 Labs is demanding is that the NYT simply stop reporting on Muslim news altogether, since this makes “Islam look bad”.
By the way, this is not the first time 416 Labs has done something like this:
http://416labs.com/nytandislam/
In it, they actually castigate people from daring to blame Muslims for the Jihad attacks in Paris.
Jack HOLAN says
Mr Saddiqui if you are a sociologist I’m saddened yet glad that you voided the validity of your study through your admission. The fact that before the study you concluded the Media was bad mouthing Muslims and Islam far greater than Christians and Jews. By the way how often do Christians and Jews lop off heads of Muslims who refuse to convert or pay Jizyah, burn Mosques because the Bible says they aren’t allowed in the lands we inhabit like the Quaran instructs Muslims to destroy the Houses of Worship of Non-Believers in all lannds that Muslims have ever controlled. Muslims from Africa to the Phillipinnes have been burning and desecrating non-believers houses of worship. So, if there more negative incidents involving Muslims and/or extreme incidents thus it’s should be reflected in the reporting. How is the reporting done about us in the Muslim Media worldwide or Muslim Press in the US. Get Real!
Ciudadano says
“report suggests that one way to combat the bias is to hire Muslim reporters, opinion writers and editors”
I just read an NYT’s article titled “The Sexual Misery of the Arab World” written by a Muslim. It seems even Muslims have a bias against Islam. Very funny.