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

New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

121–130 of 360 posts

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#121

Post by Scea91 »

peteretep wrote: post #112
ageek123 wrote: post #98

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Can you say more about why it's a good thing that they hired Sarah Jeong, who has a history of racist and sexist tweets?

It's interesting, I wasn't at all aware of her until a day or two ago. The first link I read about her was this: https://www.vox.com/2018/8/3/17644704/sarah-jeong-new-york-t... Which shows her "racist" tweets, and shows how they're only really racist if you strip away all context for them. It then shows how the alt-right use this as a tactic. I found that very interesting, and I also now find it interesting to see wh…

The context should be provided in the Vox article but it is not. Is there any article where all of the offensive tweets are available in their context?

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#122

Post by naturalgradient »

lumberjack wrote: post #120
naturalgradient wrote: post #93

The greatest marketing trick the NYT has ever pulled off is presenting themselves as the last bastion of objectivity in the trump era. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the most recent Sarah Jeong controversy and virtually all reporting on migration, feminism, campus politics etc shows this. Mind you this is from a European perspective where I see almost all reporting about politics here as copying off…

Being a liberal (the philosophy) is equivalent to being neutral and objective according to all the mainstream media, which are all liberals.

A good read on this is (at least to me as an outsider to American politics):

https://www.vox.com/2016/4/21/11451378/smug-american-liberal...

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#123

Post by zarkov99 »

radmuzom wrote: post #111
naturalgradient wrote: post #93

The greatest marketing trick the NYT has ever pulled off is presenting themselves as the last bastion of objectivity in the trump era. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the most recent Sarah Jeong controversy and virtually all reporting on migration, feminism, campus politics etc shows this. Mind you this is from a European perspective where I see almost all reporting about politics here as copying off…

[flagged]

even their incoherent stance on racism as illustrated in the Sarah Jeong debacle? I could live with a left bias but not their blatant hypocrisy.

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#124

Post by ggm »

naturalgradient wrote: post #93

The greatest marketing trick the NYT has ever pulled off is presenting themselves as the last bastion of objectivity in the trump era. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the most recent Sarah Jeong controversy and virtually all reporting on migration, feminism, campus politics etc shows this. Mind you this is from a European perspective where I see almost all reporting about politics here as copying off…

You're just saying you don't like their editorial. So.. don't subscribe!

There is no trickery here.

Far left.. you really have no idea how silly you look. There is almost no institution in the USA which actively publishes a broadsheet newspaper you could call left, let alone "far" left. Middle of the road looks pretty left from a ranty right view maybe.

(I'm a Guardian subscriber btw)

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#125

Post by pavlov »

unixhero wrote: post #78

Offtopic: I am a European, and I like to read quality journalism. Which do you recommend, a subscruption to Washington Post or NYT?

I have a digital subscription to WaPo and I've found it interesting reading even as a European. But it's still clearly a local newspaper to a certain extent: some of the political reporting is ultra-specific to the point where it's barely understandable if you're not immersed in the Washington scene.

NYT is more generic, but also has a higher volume of articles about everything under the sun. For learning about the American situation, I've found WaPo a good compromise.

I'd also recommend WSJ for a generally balanced business-centric outlook on America (their editorial and op-ed pages are basically "more tax cuts!" regardless of what is going on, but the reporting is good).

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#127

Post by toyg »

naturalgradient wrote: post #93

The greatest marketing trick the NYT has ever pulled off is presenting themselves as the last bastion of objectivity in the trump era. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the most recent Sarah Jeong controversy and virtually all reporting on migration, feminism, campus politics etc shows this. Mind you this is from a European perspective where I see almost all reporting about politics here as copying off…

I don't know how old you are, but from a 40-yo perspective, the NYT being seen as "leftist" is a terrifying signal of how right-wing the mainstream political window has gone in the US. The traditional megaphone of the East-Coast moneyed, the newspaper that sold the Iraq War to the public with lie after lie, is now seen as a bastion of liberalism.

The US is in a very dark place right now. Last time it happened, it took Katrina to briefly break the spell. I wonder what it will take this time.

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#129

Post by naturalgradient »

ggm wrote: post #124
naturalgradient wrote: post #93

The greatest marketing trick the NYT has ever pulled off is presenting themselves as the last bastion of objectivity in the trump era. Nothing could be further from the truth. I think the most recent Sarah Jeong controversy and virtually all reporting on migration, feminism, campus politics etc shows this. Mind you this is from a European perspective where I see almost all reporting about politics here as copying off…

You're just saying you don't like their editorial. So.. don't subscribe! There is no trickery here. Far left.. you really have no idea how silly you look. There is almost no institution in the USA which actively publishes a broadsheet newspaper you could call left, let alone "far" left. Middle of the road looks pretty left from a ranty right view maybe. (I'm a Guardian subscriber btw)

To be honest I think you are just proving my point by getting upset and calling me 'ranty right'. Tribalism sells because it triggers emotions like these. It works for the Guardian just as well as it works for the NYT, Fox news or anyone else.

Re: New York Times Co. Reports $24M Profit, Thanks to Digital Subscribers

#130

Post by undreren »

dazc wrote: post #22
undreren wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> One criticism of New York Times that I've read online is that they won't allow you to cancel your digital subscription through their website. They force you to call them. I'm not sure if that has changed recently, but that's a pretty questionable dark pattern. This is illegal in Europe. By law, it has to be at least as easy to cancel subscriptions, as it is to buy them. I love Europe. :)

I don't know of the legality but it is a common practice in Europe too.

Really? Where?
Post reply on HN