Actually, the New York Times has created controversy, within the past two years or so, for being the source of key false claims regarding Iraq, which were used to bolster the case for the war. The Times got into a great deal of trouble for that, and had to issue a formal apology for this faulty reporting. And one of the reporters who was likely responsible for much of that later went to prison, and retired from the paper earlier this month.

I have dealt with the issue of media bias before... As I've said then, the media is undoubtedly liberal, but that does not mean that the media will oppose warfare, interventionism, and other aspects of "liberal internationalism"... It could, in fact, mean the opposite.

A number of liberals in the media supported the Iraq war, including one of the most prominent columnists in America, New York Times writer Thomas Friedman.

The Washington Post is also very-much pro-war, and pro-interventionism.

And during the previous presidency, CNN (the Clinton News Network) was incredibly biased in favor of the war in the Balkans, as were other U.S. media outlets; in some cases, the major reporters there had connections to the Clinton administration.

And some non-liberal news sources, such as the UPI news wire, have also been providing a great deal of negative news coverage and commentary, about the Iraq war situation, and the foreign policy management of the Bush administration.

More on these issues here and here.