To the Editor:
The campaign is drawing to a close, and I wish that The Times’s coverage had been more objective. There was often little difference between news and editorial content, and a strong anti-Republican slant.
Look at your news analysis on the final debate (“Interrupting, Mocking and Taunting, Clinton Turns the Tormentor,” front page, Oct. 20). Hillary Clinton is praised for outmaneuvering Mr. Trump by adopting some of the abrasive behaviors he has shown, while the calmer Mr. Trump is mocked as “defanged.”
I will hide under my bed if Mr. Trump wins, but The Times’s dislike of him permeates news articles and throws the paper’s ability to provide truthful reporting into doubt. Mr. Trump is an extreme example, but coverage of other Republicans has followed suit. Meanwhile, the paper has tap-danced around Mrs. Clinton’s email issue.
Reporting needs to be accurate, even when showing shortcomings of a public figure. But an obvious slant toward one party doesn’t help readers, who must rely on objective reporting to make good decisions.
ANGELA CAMACK
Jackson, N.J.
Note from KBJ: Duh.
