Why civil rights activist Robert Woodson is upset with Al Sharpton and the New York Times

Civil rights activist Robert L. Woodson Sr. has long been a critic of the mainstream media for pushing the narrative that America is inherently racist, but he's particularly offended by The New York Times and MSNBC's Al Sharpton. 

Woodson, 88, penned an opinion piece in the Wall Street Journal last week, urging the nation to "disregard race in how we judge one another" before it leads to "national ruin." He believes the media has been "demeaning the values of the country in the name of promoting social justice." 

Woodson has been an outspoken critic of The New York Times' controversial 1619 Project, which aimed to "reframe" America's history through the lens of slavery. The 1619 Project won a Pulitzer Prize but has been criticized for historical inaccuracies, and Woodson is furious that it has been integrated and insinuated into the curriculum around the country.

"It is embedding in America that America should be defined by its birth defect of slavery," Woodson told Fox News Digital. 

HOW MAINSTREAM MEDIA BECAME 'PART OF THE RACE GRIEVANCE INDUSTRY' HARMING BLACK NEIGHBORHOODS

Because of Nikole Hannah-Jones' 1619 Project, along with other coverage, Woodson said the Times has been among the most egregious mainstream news organizations when it comes to belittling the values of the country.

"The New York Times has been the leading culprit in condemning the country, burning the flags, and celebrating those who demean these values. It is, in fact, those same values of the founders that enabled Blacks to survive slavery in Jim Crow," Woodson said. 

AL SHARPTON HITS BACK AT TRUMP ACCUSATION ABOUT PAID ENDORSEMENT OF KAMALA HARRIS

A New York Times spokesperson provided Fox News Digital with the following comment: "This 1619 Project was a piece of deep and original reporting that brought to light new and underexplored truths, and it's only natural that principled and rigorous reporting like this would spark reflection and discussion. The series deepened many readers' understanding of the nation's past, the lingering effects of slavery and its centrality to America's story and the significant contributions of Black Americans to this country."

The statement continued: "Readers have benefited immensely from the groundbreaking journalism of Nikole Hannah-Jones and the full team of writers and editors who brought us this transformative work. The New York Times is proud to continue pursuing vital journalism like this."

With regard to the comment about flag burning, the Times spokesperson added:  "In fact, the central essay of the 1619 Project, the one that won a Pulitzer Prize, made a case for why Black Americans should embrace the flag, and the illustrated book that came out last year featured a gallery of patriotic images of people with the flag."

Woodson also has a bone to pick with Sharpton, an MSNBC weekend host who often leads divisive rallies and put his network in an awkward situation ahead of the 2024 presidential election. 

MSNBC admitted it was "unaware" that Vice President Kamala Harris' campaign paid $500,000 to Sharpton's National Action Network nonprofit ahead of a friendly interview with the Democratic nominee. 

Harris sat down for a softball interview on Oct. 20 with MSNBC's Sharpton, an open supporter of Harris and the Democratic Party. Following Harris' loss to President Donald Trump, FEC filings revealed the Harris campaign gave two $250,000 donations to Sharpton's nonprofit organization in September and October - but the MSNBC host did not inform viewers of the contributions or the conflict of interest before or after the interview.

CLICK HERE FOR MORE COVERAGE OF MEDIA AND CULTURE

"They would never tolerate this from someone White," Woodson said. 

"You would never have a television anchor going out leading demonstrations or accepting [donations] from a political candidate and then interviewing them on their network," he continued. "Al Sharpton has been a special exception." 

MSNBC did not immediately respond to a request for comment.