Joel B. Pollack, Breitbart, November 1, 2108

The Los Angeles Times is facing criticism after it endorsed three white candidates in its English edition, but endorsed their Latino opponents in its Spanish edition.

{snip}

The races include:

In addition, the center-right “OC Political” blog notes, the English and Spanish versions differed on two ballot propositions, and the Spanish version left out several races where there were no Latinos running (but in which Latino voters will still be casting ballots).

In addition, the blog noted, “While the LA Times en Español endorsed 7 Latinos and 1 white man, the LA Times English endorsements for Statewide offices were much more ethnically balanced, with 3 white people, 3 Latinos, 2 Asian Americans, and 1 African American for State office.”

Latinorebels.com dug into the text of the endorsements themselves, and found the differences revealing:

The English version of the LA Times suggests you re-elect U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein because she comes from a more “civil and productive era of governance” and has accomplished a great deal like that. {snip}

LA Times en Español, however, has a different take. According to its editorial, de León is the best choice because he seems pragmatic and effective enough and knows the immigrant community best. And, after all, “Dianne Feinstein has been in the Senate since 1992” and that’s “too long. A generational change is needed.”

Aside from the fact that the latest argument smacks of ageism, should Spanish-speaking LA elect one senator and English Speaking LA elect another? {snip}

Local CBS affiliate KCAL-9 reported on Wednesday that the paper — “the most powerful and influential in Southern California” — called it an “innocent mistake.”

{snip}