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

The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

chappatte.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

191–196 of 196 posts

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#191

Post by smsm42 »

sonnyblarney wrote: post #87
hn_throwaway_99 wrote: post #41

Earlier quoted context omitted.

If anything, that's the thing I hate most about Twitter. A journalist who wants to write a story with a particular angle can easily find tons of supporting viewpoints on Twitter, and usually at least a few of these are somewhat clever or snarky. So the journalist writes the article and then uses these examples from Twitter to show that "the masses" agree, or are equally outraged as the author. Since when do we start…

This might be the worst trick used by media outlets to portend there's a 'movement afoot' or 'what most people' think when neither are true. "People are saying XYZ" - because some random person on Twitter said it. "People believe this" - again, some random Tweet in support. They're creating narrative, which is definitely the opposite of news, and it's way beyond 'Editorial' i.e. 'the opinion of the author'. Politicia…

> I read the news these days not for 'news', but rather to see where various groups are trying to 'focus the narrative', which is really cynical.

This is not random. It's because people who are in charge of the news decided that their side (whatever it is) winning is more important than you knowing the truth and deciding for yourself. They do not believe you can do the right choice, given truthful information, and they are determined to shape your world in a way that you'd have no choice but believe them. If it requires lying, cheating and faking - they'd lie, cheat and fake, because they have the moral high-ground and it's all ultimately for your own good.

And until people in their masses start rejecting this approach in principle - even if it's their side that is winning! - that would not stop and you will have to be extra cynical (and probably not enough cynical anyway - you are alone and those people are professionals with billion-sized budgets - they probably deceive you much more than you can know).

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#192

Post by smsm42 »

zimpenfish wrote: post #154
sonnyblarney wrote: post #87

Earlier quoted context omitted.

This might be the worst trick used by media outlets to portend there's a 'movement afoot' or 'what most people' think when neither are true. "People are saying XYZ" - because some random person on Twitter said it. "People believe this" - again, some random Tweet in support. They're creating narrative, which is definitely the opposite of news, and it's way beyond 'Editorial' i.e. 'the opinion of the author'. Politicia…

> "People are saying XYZ" - because some random person on Twitter said it. But it was ever thus - except now there is at least a random person on Twitter saying it rather than it being made up in the newsroom. > They're creating narrative Literally every media since the dawn of time has done this - it is, I think, impossible to write an objective report of something -that people will then pay for-. (cf Jim Sterling's…

> except now there is at least a random person on Twitter saying it rather than it being made up in the newsroom.

How do you know that person is not sitting in the same newsroom? Or the next one?

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#193

Post by smsm42 »

rwc wrote: post #72
quietbritishjim wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> It does confuse me that these mobs have such power on decision makers at companies and media outlets like this. The interesting thing about Twitter "mobs" is that if you look away from the computer screen or hit the button on the side of your phone, they are suddenly silent and may as well not exist. If you are a company then bad stories on Twitter could cause a significant drop in business. So if you just choose t…

Sure ... here you go: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/06/10/us/oberlin-bakery-lawsuit...

For Gibsons it wasn't just Twitter complaints. People literally picketed their store (and Oberlin admin managed and helped the protests) and Oberlin itself cut off orders from them - it was direct financial pressure. Surely when a large college that a bakery served for decades suddenly decides to cut off all orders it can hurt much more than a bunch of people putting words into a website.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#194

Post by smsm42 »

RickJWagner wrote: post #114

Yes, this. Politically correct mobs are changing the world for the worst. In today's world, Eddie Murphy wouldn't make it out the door. And we would be worse off for it. The great irony is that the very comedians who are being retroactively condemned were cutting-edge for breaking barriers in their day. John Cleese is a glaring example. I have high hopes the pendulum will some day swing back the other way, and we wil…

It it not just irony, it is on purpose. The PC party has largely captured the media, the academy and the polite society. There are still some local resistance here and there, but in a large measure they won this round of cultural war. So they do not need any troublemakers anymore, they don't want people that constantly test and push the boundaries of acceptable and reveal the absurdity of power and the nakedness of the kings. They are setting the boundaries now, they are the power and they are the kings - why would they tolerate some jackasses questioning what they have struggled so long to achieve? They done their part in the revolution, now to the re-education camps with them! If you read the history of any recent revolution, you'd see this pattern repeated over and over.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#195

Post by zimpenfish »

smsm42 wrote: post #192
zimpenfish wrote: post #154

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> "People are saying XYZ" - because some random person on Twitter said it. But it was ever thus - except now there is at least a random person on Twitter saying it rather than it being made up in the newsroom. > They're creating narrative Literally every media since the dawn of time has done this - it is, I think, impossible to write an objective report of something -that people will then pay for-. (cf Jim Sterling's…

> except now there is at least a random person on Twitter saying it rather than it being made up in the newsroom. How do you know that person is not sitting in the same newsroom? Or the next one?

> How do you know that person is not sitting in the same newsroom? Or the next one?

You don't but the "person on Twitter said XYZ" at least has a (flimsy) verification test attached to it - search on Twitter, see if you find it. Now, sure, maybe Fred from the next office over posted it after they concocted the story at lunch but the timestamp and age of the account betrays that. Also if it's an egg avatar or has a name like 'madeup9384874'.

No, it's not perfect but at least there is -some- way of potentially verifying that someone, not the reporter, said this.

Re: The End of Political Cartoons at The New York Times

#196

Post by donohoe »

colpabar wrote: post #42
donohoe wrote: post #22

To be clear, the NYT never did a lot of cartoons nor was it known for them. I really don’t think this is a big deal. If The New Yorker or sone other publication did, then maybe.

My issue isn't that they no longer have political cartoons, it's why they made the decision to remove them. And to be fair, we don't know yet. I haven't found an official statement from the NYT on this; I've only seen tweets and this guy's piece on it.

There is no ‘official’ Statement because this isn’t a big deal. This is in the realm of deciding what freelances to go with given budgets and other factors.

To this guy, this decision is clearly significant. For someone at NYT it was just another Tuesday.

Post reply on HN