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

NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

cjr.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

71–80 of 130 posts

Re: NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

#71

Post by avinium »

isbadawi wrote: post #57
fareesh wrote: post #34

The NYT recently hired someone to their editorial board who appears to be a brazen and open racist. I don't mean some kind of innuendo racist, but someone with multiple tweets like this: "Are genetically predisposed to burn faster in the sun, thus logically being only fit to live underground like groveling goblins?" The NYT excused this this as her way of "imitating the rhetoric" of those who were harassing her onlin…

https://twitter.com/awprokop/status/1025484876278112261

I'm glad you posted this.

I was aware of the original tweet a few years ago, but didn't know the context until now.

I haven't read the referenced article so I can't comment on whether it's a valid criticism or not. But it's clearly satirical.

Re: NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

#73

Post by remarkEon »

pm90 wrote: post #54
verteu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the acronym implies, a "social justice warrior" is someone who fights for social justice. Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting.

> Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting. Have you considered the possibility that these SJW's are actually representative of today's youth? If they are, shouldn't NYT be hiring even more of them? I really don't care about what the backgrounds of Journalists are, as long as they adhere to the principles of journalism (honesty, a desire to qu…

There’s an inherent conflict in “I am an activist with a specific cause (or causes) I advocate for” and “adher[ing] to the principles of journalism”. It will produce journalism that is not at all neutral (ignoring for a moment if such journalism is possible), but tainted, even unknowingly, but the views of the journalists themselves. It might not even manifest in the story itself, but in the stories they choose to cover.

Re: NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

#75

Post by noetic_techy »

pm90 wrote: post #54
verteu wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

As the acronym implies, a "social justice warrior" is someone who fights for social justice. Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting.

> Hiring journalists with a strong homogenous political agenda is a poor way to produce neutral, fact-based reporting. Have you considered the possibility that these SJW's are actually representative of today's youth? If they are, shouldn't NYT be hiring even more of them? I really don't care about what the backgrounds of Journalists are, as long as they adhere to the principles of journalism (honesty, a desire to qu…

>> Have you considered the possibility that these SJW’s are actually representative of todays youth?

That could not be further from the truth. The phenomena is very localized and manifests from confluence of factors that HAS been studied scientifically:

https://youtu.be/2e9VYf9FKHo

It would be like going back in time and saying the youth of the Communist Revolution or the youth of the Iranian Revolution were just “representative of todays youth.” The answer would be: yes, some of them, and look how that turned out for the rest. We can’t conceive of that sort of backward progression in american freedom because we have never experienced it. You have to call out negative toxic ideologies both right AND left.

I agree with your second statement, but instead you of journalists you get activist masquerading as journalists.

Re: NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

#76

Post by noetic_techy »

roywiggins wrote: post #35
babyslothzoo wrote: post #24

Earlier quoted context omitted.

So disappointing but I have noticed the same thing. NYT has dove so deep into identity politics, opinion, agenda, and editorial that it's very hard to imagine their actual legitimate journalistic/reporting division is not being negatively impacted and influenced.

What specifically about the NYT as opposed to any other newspaper? Opinion and editorial are explicitly not part of the newsroom and are published in a different section under a different heading. You may have some problems with the people they hire as opinion commentators but hiring opinionated commentators is absolutely part of the job of a good newspaper. Lefty types regularly make fun of NYT's conservative and ce…

>>Lefty types regularly make fun of NYT conservative and centrist commentators

Do you have some examples of this?

Re: NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

#77

Post by briandear »

fyoving wrote: post #2

The NYT is yet to publish a correction to an article publicizing a comically erroneous study suggesting a relationship between Facebook use and attacks on refugees in Germany: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/08/fa... They have been running smear campaigns against tech companies for years and then act dumb and ask about the change in sentiment towards them.

But yet, we give them credibility on political stories? That’s what makes no sense to me, we call them out on stories in which we have close experience, but we accept their stories on politics as if they were “objective,” because they happen to support our own bias. A story biased against the president: totally true, it’s “respectable” journalism. A story pushing an anti-Google agenda, “what were they thinking, this isn’t true!” People want to believe they are right and they find outlets that agree with them and claim them “objective.” A conservative thinks Limbaugh is correct, a liberal thinks Maddow is correct. It’s a circle jerk of self congratulation that leads to sharply partisan hatred. Unfortunately there isn’t a Walter Cronkite to find the objective middle.

Re: NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

#79

Post by _cs2017_ »

Why is not only the conservative, but even the liberal media so strongly anti-tech? Google, Facebook, and the majority of other tech firms are extraordinarily liberal, far beyond the normal California bias. And not only are their executives and employees overwhelmingly liberal, the companies often act on those beliefs (by supporting various political causes, creating a certain liberal emphasis in their educational tools, etc).

Or, put another way, how did the tech firms manage to become enemies with the liberals despite being on their side in the political battle?

Re: NYT promotes questionable study on Google and the media

#80

Post by bluecalm »

briandear wrote: post #77
fyoving wrote: post #2

The NYT is yet to publish a correction to an article publicizing a comically erroneous study suggesting a relationship between Facebook use and attacks on refugees in Germany: https://marginalrevolution.com/marginalrevolution/2018/08/fa... They have been running smear campaigns against tech companies for years and then act dumb and ask about the change in sentiment towards them.

But yet, we give them credibility on political stories? That’s what makes no sense to me, we call them out on stories in which we have close experience, but we accept their stories on politics as if they were “objective,” because they happen to support our own bias. A story biased against the president: totally true, it’s “respectable” journalism. A story pushing an anti-Google agenda, “what were they thinking, this…

Well, I don't think there are many people left who give them any credibility on political stories outside of those looking for an echo chamber. They are Fox News for people who identify as "progressive intellectuals".
Post reply on HN