The New Yorker, despite its cultural sophistication and literary legacy, has over the past few decades evolved into one of the most predictably progressive media outlets in the United States. Founded in 1925 and owned since 1985 by Condé Nast—a media conglomerate that also owns Vogue, GQ, and Vanity Fair—The New Yorker today functions less as a balanced source of journalism and more as a long-form magazine of elite liberal orthodoxy.
Though Condé Nast claims to support journalistic independence, the ideological consistency across its publications tells a different story. Its executives have increasingly prioritized “diversity” and “inclusion” over objectivity, and its editorial leadership reflects a distinct urban, upper-middle-class progressive worldview, particularly on moral, political, and cultural issues.
This worldview is echoed by the publication’s longtime editor, David Remnick, who has helmed the magazine since 1998. Under his leadership, the outlet has sharpened its focus on Donald Trump, Christian conservatives, and so-called “right-wing disinformation”—frequently elevating alarmist rhetoric about democracy, race, and gender while downplaying or ignoring scandals within progressive politics.
In short, while The New Yorker still publishes the occasional thoughtful profile or essay, it is now an institution where ideological uniformity masquerades as intellectual sophistication, and where opposition to progressive values is treated not as disagreement, but as moral failure.
Typical Claims and Outlook
The tone of The New Yorker is languid, literary, and smug—but beneath the elegance is an unmistakable ideological agenda. Its essays, cartoons, and long-form features routinely present the progressive view as obviously correct, while caricaturing or pathologizing dissenting perspectives.
Writers are trained in the rhetorical habits of liberal condescension. Rather than rebutting conservative ideas, The New Yorker prefers to imply that anyone who opposes abortion, gender theory, climate alarmism, or DEI orthodoxy must be ill-educated, religiously fundamentalist, or motivated by fear.
Buzzwords like “equity,” “white supremacy,” “anti-trans legislation,” and “existential climate threat” appear without definition or critique. Biblical morality is exoticized as dangerous nostalgia, and Christian cultural influence is viewed as something to be reduced, if not eliminated.
At a glance, The New Yorker appears less shrill than, say, MSNBC or Mother Jones, but its intellectualism is a velvet glove around the same ideological fist. It appeals not to the masses, but to the educated coastal elite who believe their worldview is not only superior—but must be imposed.
Specific Incidents of Bias
Brett Kavanaugh Coverage (2018)
Perhaps the most revealing example of The New Yorker’s partisan reporting came during the Kavanaugh confirmation hearings. The magazine published a poorly sourced accusation by Deborah Ramirez, despite multiple admissions from witnesses that they could not confirm her story. The rush to publish suggested not a commitment to truth, but a determination to destroy a conservative nominee based on ideological grounds.
The COVID-19 Narrative
Throughout the pandemic, The New Yorker elevated pro-lockdown voices while mocking concerns about religious liberty, school closures, and government overreach. It often framed vaccine skeptics and churchgoers as irrational threats to public health while failing to cover the long-term social and economic consequences of the very policies it supported.
Gaza and Israel Coverage
Following the October 2023 Hamas terrorist attacks, The New Yorker published content framing Israeli self-defense as disproportionate retaliation, and spotlighting Palestinian suffering with little mention of Hamas’s use of human shields or terror tunnels. One article even suggested the term “terrorist” should be used carefully, lest it dehumanize Hamas fighters.
The “Insurrection” of January 6
The New Yorker’s coverage of January 6, 2021, was saturated with language describing the event as an “insurrection,” a “coup attempt,” and an “existential crisis for democracy.” It offered no comparable concern for the BLM riots of 2020, which caused significantly more physical destruction and casualties. This double standard in moral outrage reveals the publication’s priorities.
Most Ideologically Reflective Figures
David Remnick, editor of The New Yorker since 1998, is one of the most influential voices in modern progressive journalism. A Pulitzer Prize winner and former Washington Post correspondent, Remnick has used his position to guide The New Yorker further into partisan terrain, especially during the Trump years. His essays consistently frame conservatism as regressive and dangerous, while celebrating leftist figures and causes with glowing admiration.
Jelani Cobb, a prominent staff writer and dean at Columbia Journalism School, exemplifies the publication’s embrace of critical race theory and systemic racism narratives. His writing portrays American history as a continual struggle between oppressive institutions and marginalized groups, often framing current Republican policies as throwbacks to Jim Crow or worse.
Susan B. Glasser, another regular contributor, specializes in longform political analysis but filters most content through the lens of “Trumpism as fascism.” Her disdain for conservatives is palpable, and her reporting on the Supreme Court and the Republican Party treats their influence as inherently illegitimate.
Together, these and other contributors shape a magazine that wraps activist narratives in the language of high culture and elite respectability. Their bias is not loud—but it is unmistakable, persistent, and foundational.
Scandals and Controversies
The Kavanaugh Allegation (2018)
As noted earlier, The New Yorker ran a piece co-authored by Ronan Farrow and Jane Mayer alleging misconduct by Brett Kavanaugh based on flimsy evidence. The central figure, Deborah Ramirez, had told friends she wasn’t even sure it was Kavanaugh. The magazine published the story anyway, prompting even some on the Left to question its editorial standards. It was a political hit dressed up as journalism.
Jeffrey Toobin’s Zoom Incident (2020)
In a widely publicized scandal, long-time New Yorker legal analyst Jeffrey Toobin was caught engaging in a lewd act during a Zoom call with colleagues. Though he was fired from The New Yorker, he later reappeared on CNN, and the incident underscored the insular culture of elite media, where even disgrace often has a short shelf life.
Resistance Journalism Gone Wild
In its obsession with Donald Trump, The New Yorker often published pieces that blurred the line between reporting and propaganda. From uncritical profiles of The Lincoln Project (later plagued by scandal) to speculative fiction about Trump refusing to leave office, the magazine repeatedly prioritized fear-mongering over factual restraint.
Cultural and Religious Mockery
Several pieces in The New Yorker have openly mocked evangelical Christians, traditional Catholics, and religious conservatives. In one cartoon, the magazine depicted a white conservative praying for gun rights while clutching a rifle like a religious icon. This is emblematic of The New Yorker’s worldview: religious faith is a curiosity, a punchline, or a threat.
The New Yorker Across 20 Defining Issues
1. Election Integrity and Voter Laws
The New Yorker regularly claims that voter ID laws and ballot security measures are modern tools of voter suppression. It emphasizes “disenfranchisement” narratives, especially among minority groups, while dismissing concerns about mail-in ballot integrity as conspiracy.
2. Abortion and Reproductive Rights
It treats abortion as a civil right and moral necessity. Articles regularly praise abortion access as healthcare and women’s empowerment, while depicting pro-life legislation as theocratic authoritarianism.
3. Gender Identity and Transgender Policies
The magazine consistently uses preferred pronouns, defends child transition procedures, and celebrates “gender-affirming care.” Opponents are portrayed as uninformed, bigoted, or aligned with Christian nationalism.
4. Race and Systemic Racism
The New Yorker is steeped in the language of systemic racism, white privilege, and equity. Its writers treat CRT as established truth and argue that virtually every American institution is built on racial exploitation.
5. Climate Change and Energy Policy
The publication is apocalyptic in tone when covering climate change. It promotes rapid decarbonization, supports the Green New Deal, and often paints fossil fuel use as morally indefensible.
6. Immigration and Border Security
Articles on immigration are heavily sympathetic to illegal immigrants. The magazine criticizes border enforcement, ICE, and citizenship laws while elevating stories of hardship and “injustice” under current policy.
7. Israel and the Middle East Conflict
The New Yorker is often critical of Israel, especially under Netanyahu. Its coverage tilts toward pro-Palestinian perspectives and downplays the ideological extremism of groups like Hamas. Language like “apartheid” and “disproportionate force” is common.
8. Second Amendment and Gun Control
Gun ownership is framed as a pathological American obsession. The magazine supports sweeping bans on semi-automatic firearms, magazine restrictions, and expanded red flag laws.
9. LGBTQ+ Rights and Religious Liberty
Religious objections to LGBTQ+ policies are treated as hate-driven. The magazine promotes the view that Christian beliefs on sexuality are a danger to civil rights and should be constrained by law where necessary.
10. COVID-19 Policy and Mandates
The New Yorker backed every major government intervention—mask mandates, lockdowns, vaccine requirements—and criticized those who raised questions about side effects, natural immunity, or civil liberties.
11. Policing and Criminal Justice
While it doesn’t use “defund the police” as explicitly as leftist blogs, the magazine supports police reform efforts, criticizes “mass incarceration,” and regularly profiles activists working to reshape law enforcement.
12. Education and Parental Rights
It supports DEI in schools, inclusive curricula on gender and sexuality, and downplays concerns about indoctrination. School choice is viewed suspiciously, while parent-led protests are often dismissed as astroturf.
13. Censorship and Big Tech
The New Yorker supports “responsible content moderation” and has criticized Elon Musk’s ownership of Twitter/X. It views alternative platforms as havens for extremism and “misinformation.”
14. January 6 and Political Violence
January 6 is portrayed as a watershed moment akin to 9/11. The magazine devoted extensive coverage to the day, emphasizing narratives of insurrection and Trump’s supposed autocratic ambitions.
15. Corporate Wokeness and ESG
It supports ESG investing, DEI hiring, and corporate statements on political issues. Pushback against these trends is labeled as part of a broader “right-wing backlash” or “anti-democracy movement.”
16. Hunter Biden, Biden Family, and Political Corruption
The New Yorker has treated Hunter Biden’s scandals with kid gloves—delaying or ignoring coverage of the laptop and influence peddling. Instead, it often frames the story as a smear campaign.
17. Trump and the Republican Party
Nearly every depiction of Trump is hostile and alarmist. He is referred to as a threat to democracy, with his voters portrayed as deluded, racist, or part of a dangerous cult.
18. Affirmative Action and Racial Preferences
Affirmative action is defended as a moral necessity. The magazine opposes the Supreme Court’s rollback of race-based admissions and suggests such decisions perpetuate inequality.
19. International Institutions and Sovereignty
The New Yorker often praises the UN, WHO, and WEF, arguing for transnational cooperation. It rarely raises concerns about sovereignty or global bureaucracies overriding national policy.
20. Culture War Issues
It supports drag queen story hours, inclusive language, and the removal of traditional moral frameworks in public institutions. Those who oppose these trends are cast as reactionary and dangerous.
Final Evaluation and Conclusion
The New Yorker is perhaps the most effective camouflage operation in American media—a deeply ideological platform cloaked in a reputation for literary prestige. While it retains the aesthetic of intellectual curiosity and nuance, its actual content increasingly functions as a filter for progressive orthodoxy, where dissent is gently dismissed or quietly erased.
Its influence is not rooted in mass appeal but in cultural gatekeeping. It doesn’t need to convince millions—it only needs to shape the opinions of academics, bureaucrats, young professionals, and cultural curators. The tone of its writing is more polished than the shrillness of cable news or the clickbait of blogs, but the underlying message is just as partisan: Progressivism is truth, and conservatism is either ignorance or malice.
In short, The New Yorker is not interested in offering both sides. Its purpose is to model a worldview: urbane, secular, socially liberal, economically technocratic, and instinctively anti-traditional. It is what you get when Ivy League moral philosophy marries MSNBC policy preferences.
The Damage Done
By presenting its left-leaning assumptions as though they are simply what educated people believe, The New Yorker has helped normalize cultural radicalism among America’s most influential classes. Whether it’s the idea that gender is fluid, that parental rights are dangerous, or that America is fundamentally oppressive, these views have been smuggled into the bloodstream of public discourse under the guise of intelligent journalism.
Moreover, the magazine’s style—the soft sarcasm, the dry moralism, the omniscient narrator voice—has been imitated across other elite publications, helping solidify a media monoculture where the same progressive assumptions echo from every direction.
When The New Yorker gives platform to writers who defend drag queen story hours in schools or who equate traditional Christians with violent extremists, it signals not just disagreement—but dismissal. Dismissal of entire communities, worldviews, and moral traditions as illegitimate.
Why The New Yorker Belongs in the Hall of Shame
It’s not the snark. It’s not the clever cartoons. It’s not even the partisan blind spots. It’s the deeper deception: that this is journalism grounded in wisdom when it’s actually ideology wrapped in wit.
The New Yorker has abandoned the vocation of journalism as a pursuit of truth and replaced it with an evangelism of elite progressivism—one that despises the moral foundations of faith, family, and freedom.
That’s why The New Yorker deserves its place in the Hall of Shame. Behind its refined tone lies a corrosive commitment to narratives that distort reality, undermine tradition, and promote a worldview that is neither balanced nor benign.
S.D.G.,
Robert Sparkman
MMXXV
rob@christiannewsjunkie.com
RELATED CONTENT
Concerning the Related Content section, I encourage everyone to evaluate the content carefully.
If I have listed the content, I think it is worthwhile viewing to educate yourself on the topic, but it may contain coarse language or some opinions I don’t agree with.
Realize that I sometimes use phrases like “trans man”, “trans woman”, “transgender” , “transition” or similar language for ease of communication. Obviously, as a conservative Christian, I don’t believe anyone has ever become the opposite sex. Unfortunately, we are forced to adopt the language of the left to discuss some topics without engaging in lengthy qualifying statements that make conversations awkward.
Feel free to offer your comments below. Respectful comments without expletives and personal attacks will be posted and I will respond to them.
Comments are closed after sixty days due to spamming issues from internet bots. You can always send me an email at rob@christiannewsjunkie.com if you want to comment on something afterwards, though.
I will continue to add videos and other items to the Related Content section as opportunities present themselves.