Some members of the White House press corps who have regular exposure to President Biden are now admitting they were "turned off" from exposing his mental decline before last week's debate in part because of the attention it has got from "right-wing media."

Since Biden's shocking debate performance, the legacy media has faced intense backlash from critics accusing them of participating in a cover-up on behalf of the president.

Morale is plummeting in the viper’s nest that passes for the Washington Post newsroom.

Not because readers are deserting the paper in droves. Not because the newspaper lost $77 million last year. The oh-so-ethical journalists of the WaPo couldn’t care less about such trivialities. They’re too busy finding ways to cover up Joe Biden’s corruption or swallowing new Deep State lies about Donald Trump’s “existential threat to democracy.” 

Let me take you back nearly four years − to late October 2020. Then-President Donald Trump and candidate Joe Biden duked it out in their second and final presidential debate before the election.

Trump made references to the recently published New York Post story about Hunter Biden’s now-infamous laptop.  

“They’re calling it the laptop from hell,” Trump said.

How right he was. The laptop just made an official appearance in federal court this week. More on that shortly.

Journalists are taught to be skeptical of sources with transparent ulterior motives.

That lesson was forgotten by the mainstream media when the New York Post reported on incriminating emails allegedly found on Hunter Biden’s laptop hard drive that could have subverted Joe Biden’s 2020 presidential aspirations. The emails reportedly showed corruption in the Biden family.

Hunter Biden’s scandalous laptop, which was originally dismissed as Russian disinformation by many media outlets, pundits and even liberal allies in the intelligence community, was formally entered into evidence and confirmed by the FBI this week in his ongoing federal gun crime trial. 

2024 has not been kind to American journalism. Mainstream news outlets — including NBC News, CBS, Washington Post, Los Angeles Times, TIME and Business Insider — have laid off hundreds of staffers. Publishers and media analysts have been casting about for possible explanations, whether difficult economic headwinds, the collapse of ad revenue or Americans’ “news fatigue” ahead of another presidential election.

Bashing National Public Radio‘s leftward bias is a favorite pastime of conservatives, especially since it is funded by taxpayer money, but critics received a boost this week from an unlikely source.

Uri Berliner, a 25-year veteran of NPR who is now a senior business editor there, published a lengthy essay this week that was remarkable because it absolutely blasted his employer’s approach to journalism. It was such a complete takedown that I found myself marveling, “He wrote this while he still works there?”

My next question was, “Will it do any good?”

NPR reporter Uri Berliner wrote an essay for The Free Press arguing that the network has lost chunks of its audience by growing too dogmatically progressive. Some of the evidence supports his claim. Unfortunately, he undermines his case by leading with an example that in no way vindicates the thesis, and actually undermines it: coverage of the Trump-Russia scandal.

Berliner presents the story as a nothingburger that NPR breathlessly hyped and then ignored when it turned out to exonerate the president:

NewsGuard discovered that The New York Times was never worth its flawless 100/100 score, but apparently only after MRC Free Speech America repeatedly called it out. 

NewsGuard finally downgraded The Times’ perfect score Feb.1 to a lukewarm 87.5/100. NewsGuard’s beef with the legacy leftist publication was that it “no longer meets NewsGuard standards for handling the difference between news and opinion responsibly.” Wow, what a revelation! Has the dystopian website traffic cop been living under a rock? 

NPR's top news executive defended its journalism and its commitment to reflecting a diverse array of views on Tuesday after a senior NPR editor wrote a broad critique of how the network has covered some of the most important stories of the age.

"An open-minded spirit no longer exists within NPR, and now, predictably, we don't have an audience that reflects America," writes Uri Berliner.