Serious is not a word that can be used to describe both the Miami Herald and its Spanish counterpart El Nuevo Herald. Don’t take my word for it. Newsweek articles published earlier this month referred to the Herald as practicing “journalistic malpractice”. I agree.
For years these two Herald publications have been misleading its reading public for its own benefit. Their editorial pages and politics devised so as to please their English readers with one message, while offering their Spanish counterparts the exact opposite. Scammers they be, we could say… a divided community used for the betterment of their bottom line.
The latest example may be one of its biggest cons. Earlier this week the Miami Herald recommended U.S. Rep. Patrick Murphy for the Senate seat Marco Rubio had left to run for president and then decided he wanted back. I, and many others, were stunned and glad to see the Herald make a wise and well thought-out decision for the post.
They wrote that Rubio “has been a disappointment.”
They stated that Rubio “has fought Obamacare at every step, even though it has brought immeasurable relief to millions who previously had no healthcare. He has joined the Senate majority in the scandalous move to block any consideration of the president’s nominee for a Supreme Court vacancy. He has unilaterally blocked other meritorious presidential nominations for purely political reasons, including confirmation of a judge he himself had once recommended.
“Beyond the political differences, there are issues of sincerity and character for voters to consider… Then he [Rubio] endorsed Mr. Trump, whom he called a con man during the campaign. And still at this late date, he continues to stand by that endorsement, even as the Republican candidate stumbles from gaffe to insult to outrage.
“Mr. Trump’s candidacy is a test of character, and Sen. Rubio is failing that test.”
What next, I wondered. The Herald had been backing Rubio since 2010. There had to be something up their sleeves.
That card turned out to be the same one pulled in 2012 when the Herald recommended Barack Obama for president only to see El Nuevo Herald recommend Mitt Romney. In other words, in 2012 the Herald borrowed a page from the Marco Rubio playbook by backing both candidates for president. Much like Marco does on issues, the Herald has backed both candidates in the same election.
And they’ve done it again in 2016.
On Sunday, El Nuevo Herald, not surprisingly in my opinion, recommended Marco Rubio for the Senate seat he had pledged not to run for and publicly admitted disdain for.
In spite of the fact that the Miami Herald had been critical of Rubio, El Nuevo wrote that “Rubio is not a candidate without faults, and we do not agree with him on all issues; for example, Obamacare, which Rubio opposes. The need for health insurance in South Florida is real.”
El Nuevo then skillfully tacks right and recommends Rubio saying that “despite these differences, we appreciate Rubio’s passion for human rights and his mastery of foreign policy, especially in Latin America and the Middle East. He has called for democratic reforms in Cuba, Venezuela and other countries with autocratic governments. He has demanded a stronger position in Syria, Iran and elsewhere, without putting American troops on the ground, and has strongly supported Israel.”
I can’t say I was surprised. We’ve been writing about the two faces of the Miami Herald for years.
Truth is that the Miami Herald and El Nuevo Herald, like Marco Rubio, want to stand on all sides of the many issues that affect us here in Miami. It’s one of the reasons that south Florida has so many problems – because of politicians like Marco Rubio, and a newspaper Newsweek Magazine shamed in their article earlier this month.