Newspapers are expected to print news, but that was most certainly not the case today with the New York Times.

It ran a story of almost 800 words on the compensation program of the New York Archdiocese for victims of sexual abuse. There was nothing new in the article: The names of the six priests, who committed their offenses in the 1970s and 1980s, had already been made public. So what was the point? None of the priests are in ministry and five were booted.

It could be argued that the New York Times has an obligation to cover everything and anything about the sexual abuse of minors. But that is simply not true, and I will prove it.

Two days ago, the media reported on the arrest of the executive director of a Queens music school for children. Oliver Sohngen, the founder of the Long Island City Academy of Music, was charged with sex trafficking and attempted sex trafficking of girls 8 to 17. After he got a pimp to supply him with the 8-year-old, he dropped her off at Chuck E. Cheese's so her parents wouldn’t think anything was wrong.

The following news outlets covered this story this week:

Daily News
New York Post
TimesLedger Newspapers
US Official News
Associated Press
CBS News New York
MailOnline (England)
NBC News New York
Pix11 New York
States News Service
US Federal News
WABC News New York
WFIN (Finlay, Ohio)

The New York Times did not cover this story.

Why did the New York Times run a story about sexual abuse in the Archdiocese of New York that took place a generation ago—containing not a single item of news—but failed to report on a breaking-news story about a public school official who was arrested for recently abusing little girls?

The bias is palpable. It is also indefensible.

Contact the public editor: public@nytimes.com