A scathing New York Times report reveals a stark contrast in the newspaper's coverage of President Joe Biden's fitness for office before and after the 2024 election.

According to The Federalist, The New York Times has finally acknowledged Biden's limitations after years of downplaying concerns about his cognitive abilities, stating it would be "hard to imagine that [Biden] seriously thought he could do the world's most stressful job for another four years."

The Times' latest report by Peter Baker and Zolan Kanno-Youngs detailed Biden's recent Africa trip, highlighting an incident where the president appeared to doze off during speeches, putting his head in his hand with closed eyes while world leaders looked on.

NYT's Pre-Election Coverage Defended Biden

Throughout Biden's presidency, The New York Times consistently defended the president against criticism regarding his age and mental acuity.

The newspaper employed various strategies to counter these concerns, including enlisting expert opinions and dismissing video evidence as misleading. Their approach notably shifted after the election concluded.

In June, when Biden needed Barack Obama's assistance to leave a fundraiser stage after freezing, The Times opted to focus on allegations of Republican manipulation rather than addressing the incident directly. Their coverage emphasized claims about "misleading" and "twisted" videos being circulated by opposition parties.

The newspaper's defensive stance extended to other incidents, including Biden's late arrival at his State of Union address, which writer A.O. Scott characterized as merely part of the president's unique style. These editorial choices reflected a pattern of minimizing concerns about Biden's capabilities.

Expert Opinions Utilized To Counter Criticism

The Times repeatedly sought expert commentary to validate Biden's cognitive state, particularly following Special Counsel Robert Hur's report about the president's memory issues. Dr. Charan Ranganath, a psychology and neuroscience professor, provided support for the newspaper's position.

Dr. Ranganath wrote for The Times, emphasizing that forgetting is a universal experience. The newspaper used his expertise to frame Biden's memory lapses as normal age-related occurrences rather than signs of cognitive decline.

Reporter Gina Kolato further reinforced this narrative by questioning the scientific validity of Hur's assessment methods. She emphasized that medical experts found the report's judgments lacked proper scientific foundation.

Previous Incidents Downplayed By Publication

The Times' approach to managing Biden's public image became particularly evident in their coverage of specific incidents. Their handling of the Jackie Walorski incident demonstrated their commitment to minimizing concerns about the president's mental state.

When Biden called out for the late Congresswoman Walorski, who had died in a car crash months earlier, The Times found an expert to normalize the behavior. Dr. Dan Blazer from Duke University School of Medicine provided commentary suggesting such memory slips were usual and not indicative of real cognitive deficits.

These editorial decisions formed part of a larger strategy to maintain public confidence in Biden's leadership capabilities during his presidency and campaign period. The newspaper's consistent defense of Biden's cognitive state remained unwavering until after the election.

Post-Election Coverage Takes New Direction

The Times' recent admission marks a significant departure from their previous editorial stance. Their latest reporting acknowledges the physical and cognitive challenges that many Americans had observed throughout Biden's presidency.

The newspaper now openly discusses Biden's frequent mumbling and instances where other leaders needed to provide physical support. This shift in coverage suggests a dramatic change in their editorial approach after the election's conclusion.

Their current reporting aligns more closely with public observations and concerns that had been previously dismissed or minimized in their coverage. This transformation in their editorial position raises questions about media objectivity during election periods.

Moving Forward From Media Shift

The New York Times' evolving coverage of President Biden's fitness for office reflects a significant change in their editorial approach following the 2024 election. Their recent acknowledgment of concerns they previously dismissed has sparked discussions about media responsibility and transparency.

The dramatic shift in The Times' coverage, from defending Biden's capabilities to acknowledging his limitations, illustrates the complex relationship between media reporting and electoral politics. This transformation in their narrative raises important questions about the role of major news outlets in shaping public perception during election cycles.