Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

mobile.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 207 posts

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#81

Post by untog »

instanton wrote: post #34
donohoe wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"propaganda efforts for their candidate" You're confusing their Opinion section with their news coverage. Completely separate groups with no overlap. Though I don't blame you for not knowing. Its not obvious - and thats a problem. This is your 2nd time posting the same comment?

"You're confusing their Opinion section with their news coverage. Completely separate groups with no overlap." You can't be serious. How people have not noticed that the NYT has blatantly turned into one big opinion section over the last 12 months is beyond me. Heck I was even going to write a quick side by side headline parser listing all articles pertaining to the three major candidates in 2016 alone to emphasize t…

There's a false equivalency issue here. Trump shouldn't get a favourable headline just because Hillary got one. It isn't propaganda to point out that he is woefully underqualified to ve President.

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#82

Post by grzm »

gnicholas wrote: post #78
0xCMP wrote: post #33

Oh you mean unlike the login-wall they've put up for every article in the past two weeks? That open access? Edit: I'm pretty mad that every NYT link I've been clicking for what has felt like two weeks has asked me to login. I was forced to finally make an account. Screw that. I'd pay if you gave me an option that made sense. I'm not going to drop $500+/year to subscribe to all the places I read from when I only read…

Yep, like the LA Times, it looks like NYT is running this promo as a way to get people to create accounts and/or log in. Interestingly, I'm getting no registration request in Chrome, but I consistently get it in Firefox. I'm running different extensions in each, so it might not be the browser that is causing the behavior. For the record, I don't mind paying for news, but I don't love the "freebie" tactic they're usin…

What's your opinion on free trials in general? Are they bad? Or is it bad in this case because it's associated to the US election?

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#83

Post by jacobolus »

stephth wrote: post #75
grandalf wrote: post #27

Wikileaks revealed that the NYT was in coordination with HRC's campaign to publish flattering stories. I think the credibility of the news organization is over.

They survived the Judith Miller controversy. What is it about the HRC-NYT emails that ends their credibility in ways that Judith Miller didn't? edit: I can't think of a good reason to downvote this question (please do explain), but I'll rephrase: the Judith Miller Iraq reporting was bad to say the least, and they got rid of her. In this case I am under the impression that the problem is a few isolated cases, but I'm…

Judith Miller and the NYT’s (and news media more generally) credulous Iraq War boosterism were much more damning. Most of the folks involved, either on the media side or the government side, suffered absolutely no consequence to their reputations.

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#84

Post by monfrere »

dariusm5 wrote: post #16

I lost all trust in the NYT after Wikileaks revealed how they sabotaged Bernie Sanders and acted as a PR agency for the Clinton campaign. http://observer.com/2016/10/wikileaks-new-york-times-propped... https://medium.com/@Starkweather/new-york-times-edited-berni... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bernie-sand...

I read the leaked emails referred to in these articles, and I don't see much that is troubling about NYT's behavior.

This is just how journalism works: the reporter has to request/negotiate access to the source. The PR folks will obviously try to spin everything positively to the reporter; that's their job. Afterward, the reporter writes up a story as objectively as possible. When some part of the story happens to be flattering, the PR people will obviously high-five themselves. When some part of the story is negative, the PR people will be disappointed and try to get the reporter to see their side.

See this article [1] from Mark Leibovich for an NYT reporter's account of one of the issues addressed in your links.

[1] http://www.nytimes.com/2016/10/14/magazine/anatomy-of-a-medi...

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#85

Post by moultano »

Mao_Zedang wrote: post #64
moultano wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Then at least link to the emails you find objectionable? Everything I've seen is just the normal process of reporters talking to the people they cover.

https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/23554 https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/4077 https://wikileaks.org/dnc-emails/emailid/27526

What do those have to do with the nytimes? (Maybe explain what you think is going on here, and why it's bad? It looks like they are suggesting questions to CNN to ask Trump in an interview?)

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#86

Post by monfrere »

grandalf wrote: post #32
dariusm5 wrote: post #16

I lost all trust in the NYT after Wikileaks revealed how they sabotaged Bernie Sanders and acted as a PR agency for the Clinton campaign. http://observer.com/2016/10/wikileaks-new-york-times-propped... https://medium.com/@Starkweather/new-york-times-edited-berni... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bernie-sand...

So did I. There's nothing wrong with a news org expressing its opinions -- on the editorial page. But a news organization earns respect by offering solid, objective reporting. To paraphrase George Orwell, journalism is writing the stories that powerful interests don't want written! The Times did the exact opposite and had a political campaign proofread stories before publication. If it weren't such a major failure of…

> The Times did the exact opposite and had a political campaign proofread stories before publication.

This is false, or misleading at best, if you're referring to the Mark Leibovich profile of Clinton. He sent an off-the-record transcript the campaign asking whether it could be put on the record, and the campaign only allowed him to publish part of it. Not ideal of course, but I'm not sure how you would avoid this, unless you think off-the-record interviews should be banned entirely.

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#87

Post by gnicholas »

grzm wrote: post #82
gnicholas wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yep, like the LA Times, it looks like NYT is running this promo as a way to get people to create accounts and/or log in. Interestingly, I'm getting no registration request in Chrome, but I consistently get it in Firefox. I'm running different extensions in each, so it might not be the browser that is causing the behavior. For the record, I don't mind paying for news, but I don't love the "freebie" tactic they're usin…

What's your opinion on free trials in general? Are they bad? Or is it bad in this case because it's associated to the US election?

Free trials are fine. But pretending that you're doing a public service by doing a free trial—at precisely the same time that you're tightening up your paywall is not my style.

But thinking deeply about it, I don't think there's much of a public service in running an election-related free trial. With 10 free articles a month, many people wouldn't have run into the paywall during this very short window (Mon-Wed). Either they're hitting the paywall either way, or they're not hitting it at all.

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#88

Post by heartbreak »

xherberta wrote: post #45
knz wrote: post #22

Earlier quoted context omitted.

NPR ( http://www.npr.org/ ) seems to be doing ok - they have a good mix of online reporting, audio from radio reporting, special features for events such as the election, and a number of successful podcasts associated with their various shows.

Is anyone else annoyed by NPR's ads for itself? Do all NPR stations run these things, claiming, "We're the only news source you need," and "We'll tell you everything you need to know."?

I'm unsure which NPR promotions you're referring to, but yes, every news organization promotes itself. Local news stations, cable news stations, traditional media, etc. all do it. Why would you expect them to not self-promote?

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#89

Post by fuqted »

dariusm5 wrote: post #16

I lost all trust in the NYT after Wikileaks revealed how they sabotaged Bernie Sanders and acted as a PR agency for the Clinton campaign. http://observer.com/2016/10/wikileaks-new-york-times-propped... https://medium.com/@Starkweather/new-york-times-edited-berni... http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/bernie-sand...

From the headlines:

>Inside Donald Trump's Last Stand: An Anxious Nominee Seeks Assurance

>Optimism From Hillary Clinton and Darkness From Donald trump at Campaign's End

>Donald Trump's Big Bet on Less Educated Whites

Re: The New York Times to Offer Open Access on Web and Apps for the Election

#90

Post by fuqted »

iamdave wrote: post #50
thesagan wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Adding to your point: I sense they've taken a tacky and somewhat nannyish "guardian of democracy" approach in their headline selection lately. I like to be told the news, but it felt as if I was being told how I should be voting; it seemed manipulative and insulting to my intelligence and experience. I feel a sense of distrust between the news editors and their readers; that Citizen Kane feeling. That said, I thought…

> but it felt as if I was being told how I should be voting I've felt this sentiment since slightly before the conventions. Ask this independent voter why he's anxious for this to all be over? It's all the "Do you want Trump? Because that's how you get Trump" histrionics.

"Do you want Hillary?"
Post reply on HN