Patterico's Pontifications

1/3/2018

New York Times Profits From Tourism To Iran

Filed under: General — Dana @ 6:33 am

[guest post by Dana]

A little postscript about The New York Times and Iran: It appears that in spite of the growing protests, the paper of record remains intent on providing tourist money to the oppressive state as well as reaping their own profit from selling tours to Iran:

The company is selling nine different 13-day tours of Iran in 2018. Individual tickets for the program, “Tales from Persia,” cost $7,895. The weighty price tag doesn’t include your flights to and from the Islamic Republic, but it does buy you the companionship of a handful of Times “experts” to accompany you on the trip, in addition to the state-approved domestic tour guide.

The trip itinerary includes two days in Isfahan, which is currently a focal point of the anti-regime protests that have left at least 21 people dead.

According to the report, the Grey Lady is closely monitoring the situation unfolding in Iran through their security contacts in the region.

The New York Times “Journeys” page, which provides trip information, itineraries and the roster of “experts” scheduled to lead the trips this year (the majority of whom supported the Iran nuclear deal), amusingly offers this defense and justification for these little tourist jaunts – jaunts estimated to bring in a gross profit of $1.5 million to the company this year:

Though Iran often rejects Western ways and is frequently under fire for its positions on human rights, its nuclear program and Israel, its role as a birthplace of civilization cannot be denied. This journey with The New York Times, praised for its intensive and clear-eyed coverage of Iran going back decades, takes you behind the headlines.

(Q: Whose headlines? The New York Times? Because just yesterday we were reminded that their headlines can be a bit um, misleading…)

When the tours began in 2015, Foreign Policy noted the message the New York Times’ involvement with Iran would send to the world:

“[S]uch voyages to Iran would be impossible absent approval from high-level figures in the host country’s government,” James Kirchick wrote in Foreign Policy in December 2015. “Luxury tours of this sort bring much-needed revenue to the country. And since they are operated by America’s newspaper of record, they also provide a stamp of legitimacy to a regime most Americans rightly loathe.”

Currently, the U.S. State Dept. has this warning posted on its website. In part:

U.S. citizens should very carefully weigh the risks of and consider postponing planned travel to Iran…

Iranian authorities continue to unjustly detain and imprison U.S. citizens, particularly Iranian-Americans, including students, journalists, business travelers, and academics, on charges including espionage and posing a threat to national security. Iranian authorities have also prevented the departure, in some cases for months, of a number of Iranian-American citizens who traveled to Iran for personal or professional reasons.

The Iranian government continues to repress minority religious and ethnic groups, including Christians, Baha’i, Arabs, Kurds, Azeris, and others. Consequently, some areas within the country where these minorities reside, including the province of Sistan-Baluchistan near the border with Pakistan and Afghanistan and the provinces of Kurdistan and East-Azerbaijan in the northwest of the country near the Iraqi border, remain unsafe. Iranian authorities have detained and harassed U.S. citizens, particularly those of Iranian origin. Former Muslims who have converted to other religions, religious activists, and persons who encourage Muslims to convert are subject to arrest and prosecution.

And while one might strenuously object to this cash-cow relationship between The New York Times and Iran, it’s good to know there’s always a silver lining:

Untitled

Heh.

–Dana

25 Responses to “New York Times Profits From Tourism To Iran”

  1. No shame.

    Dana (023079)

  2. Ahh, the Grey Lady. Never fails to disappoint. In the immortal words of Home Alone: “Merry Christmas ya filthy animals”.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  3. The media doesn’t see their bias – even in situations like this. And Democrats will turn a blind eye and defend their media brethren.

    The case of Iran will magnify this because the media and Democrats told us for months that the Iranian regime was a worthy partner in the nuclear deal. To say anything different would tarnish Obama’s legacy. And we can’t have that.

    MacGruber (ade50d)

  4. and smarmy snot-filled Starbucks, always eager to lecture Americans about how slutty, racist and trashy they are, continues to expand its relationship with the mullah cheerleaders at the New York Times

    here

    here

    happyfeet (28a91b)

  5. happyfeey, Starbucks very first comparison is a usual leftist lie: UNITY/DIVISION. Aren’t they the ones touting diversity as a benefit? Diversity=division or are they not aware of the Latin root diviso meaning “to split up”?

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  6. The New York Times: All the news that makes us money.

    nk (9651fb)

  7. The New York Times: Because somebody has to make Dennis Rodman seem sane.

    nk (9651fb)

  8. The New York Times: “It was late in the day and our deadlines were looming,”

    That was their actual excuse for trotting out the ‘Sarah Palin’s map caused the Giffords shooting’ smear after the Scalise shooting.

    harkin (8256c3)

  9. Kinda funny how all those thousands of women who were wearing genital hats against evil Trump are mostly silent about Iranian Theocrats denying millions of women basic rights.

    Maybe they actually believed Linda Sarsour when she said wearing hijabs was enabling for women.

    I wonder where exactly does Obama’s ‘Champion Of Change’ stand on women’s rights in Iran.

    harkin (8256c3)

  10. Everybody, even leftist realize the mission of the Times is to smear the right and denigrate America. Well, mission accomplished. Of course by doing that they have made themselves into the all time biggest liars in print media history.
    https://i1.wp.com/www.powerlineblog.com/ed-assets/2017/12/Covfefe-sticker.jpeg?resize=580%2C151

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  11. Because Cuba is not anti-American enough for these thrill-seekers.

    Patricia (5fc097)

  12. I have so must distrust for the NYT I don’t even read their ads. The same holds true for their propaganda: once a side is shown to be not just biased (after all, every side puts forth information sympathetic to its argument!), but outright deceptive, all credibility falls away. I, like most people, have a strong aversion to being intentionally lied to.

    Like when comrade Ben! insists upon using the outdated 35% number when just last week he was corrected and informed the latest was 46%. I guarantee if the approval number dropped to 24% he’d change it. Staying with 35% when it’s outmoded is deception when you know better.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  13. The New York Times: We deceive, you decide.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  14. “Because Cuba is not anti-American enough for these thrill-seekers”

    Reminds me of the tours The Nation used to run to the Soviet Union in the 70s/80s – experience the worker’s paradise and the shining example of how communism is superior to free-market capitalism…..but don’t forget to bring your own coffee, aspirin and toilet paper.

    harkin (8256c3)

  15. Don’t think we’ll see ASPCA slobbering all over the Times in this thread like he did in the last.

    NJRob (b00189)

  16. It’s so strange to watch Swedish news broadcasts where there is no squelching of coverage of Iran protests, and compare to CNNS initial blackout and later grudging minimization of what is going on there. It’s just mind boggling.

    It reminds me of the summer of 15, when even the state run news wildly in favor of immigration and/or asylum actually showed the massive waves of people arriving and reported on the eventual overwhelm occurring. (There was a point when the penny dropped, it began to show in the faces of the news casters) The USA news agencies in contrast were so much more cynical (and therefore selective) in what they chose to reveal.

    SarahW (3164f0)

  17. @15. Au contraire. Be happy; capitalist pigs should squeal w/delight– the NYT is in business to make money. You know, like a global oil conglomerate.
    _____

    @6. Imagine that.

    DCSCA (797bc0)

  18. that’s why carlos slims is selling off floors like raffle tickets,

    narciso (d1f714)

  19. The New York Times would have been happy to profit from selling one-way tickets from West Berlin to East Berlin.

    JVW (42615e)

  20. They’re all too glad to report Trump protesting Bannon. https://www.nytimes.com/2018/01/03/us/politics/trump-bannon.html

    nk (dbc370)

  21. JVW, the NYT would have been happy selling one way tickets from West Berlin to a gulag.

    Rev.Hoagie (6bbda7)

  22. 21

    There is a thread..but with a cost.

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (421404)

  23. Why do conservatives deny leftists their slice of the economic pie?

    Clinton’s getting rich, boo-hoo!..Soros, whine! NYT making money selling fishwrap..teeth-gnashing

    Admiral Ben Bunsen Burner (421404)

Leave a Reply

Comment moderation is enabled. Your comment may take some time to appear.


Powered by WordPress.

Page loaded in: 0.2426 secs.