See also. I did cancel my NY Times subscription yesterday, with a heavy heart. The execrable headline, whatever Dean Baquet's excuses, was the final straw for me. Leaving aside the hiring of Bret...
I did cancel my NY Times subscription yesterday, with a heavy heart. The execrable headline, whatever Dean Baquet's excuses, was the final straw for me.
Leaving aside the hiring of Bret Stephens, whose pretensions to intellectual conservatism would make George Will blush, and the Times' lengthy history among the stenographers to power, I'm already paying subscriptions to the Washington Post and other outlets that have better quality news and political writing.
Au revoir, NYT, hopefully in a time when journalism figures itself out again.
i think banquet's problem here is he's trying to--wrongly--frame this as an issue of the new york times playing opposition to the trump administration when it's actually one of them continually...
i think banquet's problem here is he's trying to--wrongly--frame this as an issue of the new york times playing opposition to the trump administration when it's actually one of them continually falling for nonexistent pivots by the trump administration. like, i absolutely don't want the times to be explicitly an opposition paper to donald trump--but it's also objectively not playing the opposition to just say he's a racist or divisive even as he insinuates and acts like he's not those things. in the same vein, trump objectively did not "urge unity" like the first headline said, nor did he "assail hate" like the second one said; a teleprompter and a speechwriter did that, and donald played the part for the allotted time and went back to saying hateful and divisive shit immediately afterwards--that #resistance people happen to agree with that framing of things does not mean it is #resistance to present that framing. it's literally common sense. i mean shit, he fired off like four tweets today about how low energy joe biden is and how beto is basically a race traitor and how sherrod brown is a failing dweeb presidential candidate even though he's not running for president.
It's not even about reporting events straightforwardly any more. Unlike Baquet's mealy-mouthed pleading for moderation in language, good journalism should recognise and name established historical...
It's not even about reporting events straightforwardly any more. Unlike Baquet's mealy-mouthed pleading for moderation in language, good journalism should recognise and name established historical patterns that underlie discrete events.
There's no point in reporting a Trump eructation in isolation, you have to give it background and context. If it's the usual barrage of mendacity, say so, instead of repeating it with an assumption of good faith. Maybe an honest headline in 12 or so characters would have been, "Prez: 11k lies".
See also.
I did cancel my NY Times subscription yesterday, with a heavy heart. The execrable headline, whatever Dean Baquet's excuses, was the final straw for me.
Leaving aside the hiring of Bret Stephens, whose pretensions to intellectual conservatism would make George Will blush, and the Times' lengthy history among the stenographers to power, I'm already paying subscriptions to the Washington Post and other outlets that have better quality news and political writing.
Au revoir, NYT, hopefully in a time when journalism figures itself out again.
i think banquet's problem here is he's trying to--wrongly--frame this as an issue of the new york times playing opposition to the trump administration when it's actually one of them continually falling for nonexistent pivots by the trump administration. like, i absolutely don't want the times to be explicitly an opposition paper to donald trump--but it's also objectively not playing the opposition to just say he's a racist or divisive even as he insinuates and acts like he's not those things. in the same vein, trump objectively did not "urge unity" like the first headline said, nor did he "assail hate" like the second one said; a teleprompter and a speechwriter did that, and donald played the part for the allotted time and went back to saying hateful and divisive shit immediately afterwards--that #resistance people happen to agree with that framing of things does not mean it is #resistance to present that framing. it's literally common sense. i mean shit, he fired off like four tweets today about how low energy joe biden is and how beto is basically a race traitor and how sherrod brown is a failing dweeb presidential candidate even though he's not running for president.
It's not even about reporting events straightforwardly any more. Unlike Baquet's mealy-mouthed pleading for moderation in language, good journalism should recognise and name established historical patterns that underlie discrete events.
There's no point in reporting a Trump eructation in isolation, you have to give it background and context. If it's the usual barrage of mendacity, say so, instead of repeating it with an assumption of good faith. Maybe an honest headline in 12 or so characters would have been, "Prez: 11k lies".