The New York Times is under significant scrutiny regarding how it portrayed an interview with former President Joe Biden, particularly covering the use of the autopen in signing pardons. In a rare interview, Biden spoke with the Times for about ten minutes, addressing inquiries from Donald Trump and Republican lawmakers about the legality of his pardons, which he claimed were primarily signed using an autopen.
While Biden maintained that he made all the crucial decisions, calling Trump a “liar,” the Times reported that he “did not individually approve each name” on the pardons list. This detail was tucked away in the 32nd paragraph of the article, which cited Biden and his aides. Interestingly, it was noted that Biden signed off on the criteria used to evaluate which prisoners were eligible for sentence reductions after extensive discussions.
On the last day of his presidency, Biden reportedly approved the autopen for pardons. The relationship between the Biden administration and the Times had remained distant, as Biden had largely avoided interviews with journalists since taking office. The Times had expressed particular concern over this lack of media engagement, labeling it “troubling.”
Professor Jeffrey McCall from Depaw University reportedly suggested that Biden’s team aims to control the narrative regarding the autopen by talking to sympathetic media sources. He argued that mainstream media often approached Biden cautiously, which may not always translate to robust journalistic scrutiny.
Trump, in response to the autopen controversy, claimed ignorance about the situation. Tim Young, a media strategist, posited that Biden’s engagement with the Times was a strategic move to mitigate backlash. Young remarked that the pressure surrounding Biden’s decision-making and the subsequent lack of transparency could potentially create a constitutional crisis.
Some commentators, like Curtis Houck, criticized the Times for its reporting, calling it “embarrassing” and suggesting it should have been heavily edited to better represent the facts. Political analyst Mark Halperin pointed out that the Times seemed lacking in its journalistic standards by not including responses from opposing viewpoints or legal experts regarding Biden’s statements on the autopen’s use.
Independent journalist Drew Holden commented on the implications of Biden’s actions, questioning the reliability of the reporting, given that his staff had ultimately decided on the final sign-off for many of the pardons. Young described Biden’s interview as a desperate attempt to clarify what could be a major political issue, especially concerning perceptions of his mental fitness as president.
The New York Times did not respond to requests for further comments at the time.
