Upside-Down Flag Controversy: The New York Times' Scoop and The Washington Post's Missed Opportunity

A media critic has criticized The Washington Post for giving The New York Times the opportunity to break the story about an upside-down American flag flown in Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's front yard, a story that could have been a scoop for the Post.

The Washington Post has faced criticism for missing the opportunity to break the story about an upside-down American flag flown in Supreme Court Justice Samuel Alito's front yard, a story that was instead scooped by The New York Times.

Media critic Erik Wemple has bashed the Post, his employer, for giving the Times the opportunity to break the story. Wemple argues that the Post should have published the story three years ago, when it first learned about it, and that its failure to do so was a "black eye" for the paper.

The Post's managing editor at the time, Cameron Barr, has said he regrets not publishing the story. However, Wemple argues that the Post made several mistakes in its handling of the story, including not reaching out to Emily Baden, the neighbor who got into an argument with the Alitos, until after the Times's story was published.

Wemple also argues that the Alitos received deference to which they were not entitled. He writes that Baden called the Alito family's explanation of the neighborhood argument "absolutely ridiculous and everybody knows it."

The Washington Post has not responded to a request for comment from Fox News Digital.

The controversy over the upside-down flag has raised questions about Alito's impartiality in cases related to the January 6th Capitol riot. Some Democrats have called for Alito to recuse himself from such cases, citing his wife's public support for former President Donald Trump.

However, Alito has said he will not recuse himself from any cases related to the January 6th riot. In a letter to Congress, Alito said that he "will not let anyone, no matter how high the office they hold, interfere with the impartial performance of my judicial duties."

The controversy over the upside-down flag has also reignited concerns about the politicization of the Supreme Court. Some critics have accused Alito of being too closely aligned with the Republican Party.

However, Alito has defended his record, saying that he is "a fair and impartial judge" who "decides cases based on the law, not on politics."

The controversy over the upside-down flag is just the latest in a series of controversies that have raised questions about the impartiality of the Supreme Court. In recent years, the Court has issued several rulings that have been seen as favoring conservative causes.

This has led some critics to accuse the Court of being a "partisan institution" that is no longer capable of rendering impartial decisions. However, the Court's defenders argue that it is simply following the law, and that its decisions are not based on politics.

The controversy over the upside-down flag is likely to continue, and it will likely further fuel the debate over the impartiality of the Supreme Court.