Mark Halperin accused The New York Times of treating former Trump supporters who criticize the ex-president as media "heroes," citing recent coverage of Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene. Halperin made the remarks on 2WAY’s The Morning Meeting and used a hypothetical GOP candidate with an extreme controversy to illustrate perceived double standards. The critique followed Carlson’s cordial interview with Times reporter Lulu Garcia-Navarro, which drew praise from Megyn Kelly and skepticism from Manhattan Institute commentator Jesse Arm. The debate underscores concerns about media framing and whether sympathetic profiles can legitimize polarizing figures.
Mark Halperin Criticizes The New York Times for Lionizing Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene
Media commentator Mark Halperin on Monday publicly criticized The New York Times, accusing the paper of elevating right-wing figures who have broken with former President Donald Trump into celebrated subjects rather than treating them with the same scrutiny it applies to others.
Speaking on 2WAY’s The Morning Meeting, Halperin pointed to recent Times coverage of Tucker Carlson and Marjorie Taylor Greene as evidence of what he called a change in tone. He argued the paper appears to reward former Trump supporters who distance themselves from the ex-president by giving them prominent, often sympathetic profiles.
“Their heroes now are people who used to support Donald Trump, but no longer do,” Halperin said. “If you supported Donald Trump like Marjorie Taylor Greene or Tucker, and now you’re adverse to Trump, boy, The New York Times loves you.”
Halperin offered a hypothetical to underline his point: imagine a Republican Senate candidate in a crucial race who had defeated an establishment rival but carried a history of extreme controversies — for example, a recently removed tattoo with a Nazi symbol and past comments condoning sexual violence. He asked listeners to consider whether the Times would treat such a nominee leniently if that person were seen as opposing Trump.
The remarks followed a high-profile Times interview with Tucker Carlson conducted by reporter Lulu Garcia-Navarro, which several observers described as relatively cordial despite sharp political differences. Television host Megyn Kelly praised Garcia-Navarro’s approach, saying she “tries to be fair” and “did a very nice job with Tucker.”
Others were less impressed with descriptions of the interview as “intense.” Jesse Arm of the Manhattan Institute wrote that the full exchange was “far from ‘intense’,” characterizing it instead as largely cordial with only limited pushback. Arm and Halperin argued that the Times frequently publishes polished, quasi-glamorous profiles of figures such as Carlson, Nick Fuentes, Marjorie Taylor Greene and James Fishback, while offering less flattering coverage to right-of-center figures who remain aligned with Trump.
Halperin echoed Arm’s point in a quote-tweet, adding: “Only add is they are also now able to be cast as anti-Trump and thus @nytimes heroes. The enemy of their enemy….”
Why This Matters
The exchange highlights ongoing debates about media framing: whether major outlets inadvertently legitimize controversial or fringe figures by granting them prominent, sympathetic coverage, and how the status of being critical of a dominant political leader can change how journalists and readers perceive a subject. The discussion also raises questions about consistency in journalistic standards when covering contentious political personalities.
Originally reported on Mediaite.
Help us improve.
