Once upon a time, television stations didn’t run 24 hours a day.

When they signed off for the night, they would generally close with station announcements, the national anthem and then go to static or a test pattern.

Here’s a sample:

Now most channels pretty much all run 24 hours and fill the time with things like infomercials or other inexpensive programming.

But some stations are apparently trying to revive the old tradition of closing with the flag and the national anthem.

About 350 stations including Gray Television, CBS and Nexstar Media Group have all gone back to the tradition.

But that has triggered the New York Times.

According to culture reporter Julia Jacobs, reviving this practice might offend some people because the national anthem is “politically charged” and the song could be a “dividing line” for some Americans.

Citing the Kaepernick kneeling controversy, the Times said the revived tradition came “at a time when overt allegiance to ‘The Star-Spangled Banner’ has become one of the lines that separate blue and red America.”

Seriously? If you’re triggered by the national anthem on TV, you have issues. And guess what, you can turn it off. But is she actually claiming/admitting “blue America” doesn’t like America?

I thought that Colin Kaepernick and his cohort were claiming that this was about police brutality, not attacking America or the national anthem? So why should the flag and playing the Star Spangled Banner be “political?” Of course, when he first started his protest, he was much more honest about it being an attack on America saying he refused “to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people.”

The kneeling angered folks on the right and made Kaepernick a hero of the far left.

But the Times had to admit that they really hadn’t heard any complaints about the revival of the sign-off.

From Fox News:

“Television executives were explicit in saying that playing the national anthem regularly had nothing to do with the kneeling controversy,” the Times reporter wrote before adding that some feel support of the “politically charged song” has become a “loyalty test.”

“It is somewhat provocative to bring the anthem to the fore in a new way at a moment of tension in this country,” University of Michigan professor Mark Clague told the paper.

That was about the best they could do.

Dan Gainor of the Media Research Center noted how their story really said more about the New York Times and the left than about other Americans.

“It’s inspiring that local news is returning our National Anthem to an important place in our culture. It’s astonishing that The Times would see that as a bad thing,” Media Research Center vice president Dan Gainor told Fox News. “But if you pay close attention to the story, the paper admits that the left, including journalists, doesn’t like the national anthem. That shows exactly who and what they really are.”

Humorist and author Tim Young echoed that thought.

“Should it shock anyone at this point that the New York Times is trying to get people to be outraged at the airing of the national anthem? Their piece is written as if viewers should be skeptical of every element of the song and accompanying video,” Young said. “They don’t like America and its anthem and they want you to dislike it as well.”

Young added that people “have the option to move to Canada, where they alter their anthem in line with their social justice wokeness” if the “The Star-Spangled Banner” is so offensive.

“It’s only a short drive from The Times’ New York City headquarters,” Young said. “In the span of a week, the Washington Post calls a terrorist psychopath a ‘religious scholar’ and the Times is upset about the national anthem being played. These are supposed to be America’s top two news publications, and they seemingly hate America.”