In a July 12 column, Media Research Center founder and president L. Brent Bozell III argued that The New York Times is “rooting for the homosexual revolution” and “actively spread[ing] the gay gospel” in the articles it publishes and through its sponsorship of events such as the 2006 Gay Games -- an athletic competition that, according to its website, was founded “primarily to showcase LGBT [Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender] sports.” Bozell wrote that the Times' sponsorship of the Gay Games shows that the newspaper prefers “to violate openly your commitment to journalism standards than assist the 'bigots' by attempting to appear fair and neutral.”

As an example of purported pro-gay bias, Bozell pointed to recent Times coverage (here and here) of a July 6 New York state Court of Appeals decision that concluded that “denying marriage to same-sex couples does not violate the State Constitution.” Bozell complained that the disappointment of gay rights advocates, or “marriage-manglers,” was on full display in “two large photographs” that ran in the Times while no photos were shown of a “traditional marriage supporter celebrating the ruling.” Bozell wrote:

Inside the Times, the slant continued with two large photographs of gay activists protesting and consoling one another arm in arm about the court decision. Why not a photo of a traditional marriage supporter celebrating the ruling? Because it seems to be in every national-media rulebook that the “gay marriage” story must be accompanied by gay activists protesting, kissing, cheering, or “marrying.” Only one side matters.

Bozell also noted that the Times is a sponsor of New York's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center, and in “another dramatic corporate step toward taking sides in America's culture clash,” the Times “is a 'global sponsor' of the seventh 'Gay Games' ” Bozell continued: “Yes, you read that correctly. The Gay Games. Who would sponsor this stupidity?” Although Bozell noted that “The Chicago Sun-Times and WMAQ-TV, the local NBC-owned and operated affiliate, are also 'global sponsors,' ” he left out a number of other corporate sponsors.

Bozell asked of the Times sponsorship: “Whatever happened to 'objective' media outlets at least pretending to avoid taking sides?” and asserted the Times was, in its sponsorship of the event, “shar[ing in] the Gay Games goals, to 'foster and augment the self-respect of lesbians and gay men throughout the world and to engender respect and understanding from the nongay world.' ” He then attributed the Times' actions to “political correctness,” and held that for the Times “it is better to violate openly your commitment to journalism standards than assist the 'bigots' by attempting to appear fair and neutral.”

In conclusion, Bozell wrote the Times is “sending a message to America's solid majority” that “you're all intolerant bigots on the wrong side of history. And you will be defeated, even if we have to make utter asses of ourselves in the process.”

From the July 12 online editorial by Media Research Center president L. Brent Bozell III:

This outrage was plastered at the top of the Times with two “news” stories. One was a front-page editorial (they call it a “news analysis”) by Patrick Healy, who focused on the “gay rights advocates” and their disappointment. “Nowhere did gay marriage seem more like a natural fit than New York,” he complained, where “a history of spirited progressivism” should have made the victory of the marriage-manglers inevitable.

Inside the Times, the slant continued with two large photographs of gay activists protesting and consoling one another arm in arm about the court decision. Why not a photo of a traditional marriage supporter celebrating the ruling? Because it seems to be in every national-media rulebook that the “gay marriage” story must be accompanied by gay activists protesting, kissing, cheering, or “marrying.” Only one side matters.

[...]

But the Times isn't just rooting for the homosexual revolution on the outside and inside of the newspaper. It has actively spread the gay gospel by funding the National Lesbian and Gay Journalists Association, and adorning its conventions with recruitment booths. The Times also is a proud corporate sponsor of New York's Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual & Transgender Community Center, a gay-activist hub which boasts of being the birthplace of both the radical ACT UP and the Gay and Lesbian Alliance Against Defamation.

This month, The New York Times has taken another dramatic corporate step toward taking sides in America's culture clash. The newspaper is a “global sponsor” of the seventh “Gay Games” taking place in Chicago from July 15 to 22.

Yes, you read that correctly. The Gay Games.

Who would sponsor this stupidity? The New York Times is not alone; it is joined by other “objective” news outlets. The Chicago Sun-Times and WMAQ-TV, the local NBC-owned and operated affiliate, are also “global sponsors.” They share the Gay Games goals, to “foster and augment the self-respect of lesbians and gay men throughout the world and to engender respect and understanding from the nongay world.”

Got that, nongayers? Whatever happened to “objective” media outlets at least pretending to avoid taking sides? This is the essence of political correctness: it is better to violate openly your commitment to journalism standards than assist the “bigots” by attempting to appear fair and neutral.

And it gets zanier still. The New York Times is not only sponsoring the Gay Games, it's having a pro-gay event there as well. As part of the “Times Talks” series, the newspaper will host a panel discussion on July 17 at the Chicago Public Library titled (so help me, I'm not making this up) “Brokeback Locker Room.” Times contributor Robert Lipsyte will discuss with a panel of six gay athletes (and no opposition) how the “climate of acceptance” has changed in professional sports, and “What can be done to reduce the level of homophobia in the locker room and the media?”

[...]

That's just crazy. But by placing its famous name squarely on the side of the gay left, the New York Times is sending a message to America's solid majority against putting thousands of years of tradition through the shredder. It says: you're all intolerant bigots on the wrong side of history. And you will be defeated, even if we have to make utter asses of ourselves in the process.