Live data from Hacker News

Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

nymag.com

31–40 of 152 posts

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#31
post #9

In my opinion the NYT has been the clearest and most unrelenting source of anti-Trumpism in the Trump era, and continues to push hard as Trump is not showing signs of letting go. Historically this may play out as NYT devolving into a hopelessly polarized sensationalist pseudo news source, but it could be cemented as a clear stand against despotic inclinations in the Presidency when few others were so determined.

You are confusing anti-Trump bias with telling the truth. Trump being a pathological liar means that any given story about him will sound bad. Example: “Trump said today he is still under audit and unable to release his tax returns. Of course there is zero reason why being under audit would prevent someone from releasing their tax returns and the most likely explanation is that there is evidence of tax fraud that can…

Okay, sure, Trump misrepresented that maybe -- although his tax returns are typical of someone with lots of depreciable real estate, and don't have much evidence of fraud.

But let's talk about other so-called trump 'lies'. What about the continued doubts by the NYT that there would soon be news about a working coronavirus vaccine at the end of October, early November? What about the Steele Dossier that is now known to have been paid for by Russia (which Trump said at the beginning, but was claimed to be a lie)? What about the forced firing via threat of withholding aide of the Ukrainian prosecutor by Joe Biden, who denied being involved with his son's business dealings in the Ukraine? We were told that was lies, but there is indisputable DKIM evidence that an e-mail from Burisima to Hunter Biden thanked him for meeting his father while he was in office (https://github.com/robertdavidgraham/hunter-dkim). Are those lies too?

Sure Trump lies, like any other politician. But sometimes he tells the truth, and the truth is so ludicrous, that it seems like lies, but when it finally comes out that it was true, we all sit and say to ourselves... maybe we should believe the guy. But I mean... continue on with the denial, you'll just turn more formerly anti-Trump people into pro-Trumpers.

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#32
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

You are confusing anti-Trump bias with telling the truth. Trump being a pathological liar means that any given story about him will sound bad. Example: “Trump said today he is still under audit and unable to release his tax returns. Of course there is zero reason why being under audit would prevent someone from releasing their tax returns and the most likely explanation is that there is evidence of tax fraud that can…

Okay, sure, Trump misrepresented that maybe -- although his tax returns are typical of someone with lots of depreciable real estate, and don't have much evidence of fraud. But let's talk about other so-called trump 'lies'. What about the continued doubts by the NYT that there would soon be news about a working coronavirus vaccine at the end of October, early November? What about the Steele Dossier that is now known t…

Do I really need to point you towards the Trump lie tracker? I am only exaggerating a little when I say that if he says ten words, he emits 11 lies.

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#33
I still highly respect NYT but I agree that the tone of its headlines (if not the actual article text) in general has gotten more sensationalized over time. I now read both NYT and the news section of WSJ to get a more balanced perspective (I steer clear of the opinion section of WSJ because it's a total dumpster fire).

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#34

I have a simpler explanation for media failure. Huge job cuts. Many journalists are now doing work of multiple positions in many places especially online media. New York Times has reduced the number of their total editors in the last 10 years for example. Every major online media had layoffs comparable to 10% of their total workforce in the last 5 years. It affects mid level journalists the most so there are more int…

Did you read the story? NYT newsroom is bigger than ever, it has more cash than ever and has increased it's amount of subscribers several-fold

It will be interesting to see how they do once Trump is gone. As the article mentions, Trump's presidency was very good for their subscriptions.

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#35

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the story? NYT newsroom is bigger than ever, it has more cash than ever and has increased it's amount of subscribers several-fold

https://www.statista.com/statistics/192848/revenue-of-the-ne... It doesn't have more revenue than it did a decade and half ago.

That's mostly losses related to ad revenue. Subscription revenue has increased steadily over the last decade. https://investors.nytco.com/news-and-events/press-releases/n...

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#36
Oh the circumlocutions of woke centrists...

NYT's slant is currently ammo for "class reductionists"[1], but if they were to enage in some of the dirtbag left stuff of the sort that Putin likes to sponsor, they could make the MSNBC Moms uncomfortable from both sides of the political spectrum (!), and antipodal-ly restore some bipartisan credibility.

[1]: https://www.salon.com/2020/07/25/how-calling-someone-a-class... (much better than "Salon" would usually indicate)

---------

The article puts James Bennet in a kinda good light, but that is wrong as the Opinion section is trash trolling of boomers and he made it worse.

It would be bad business sense in the short term, but they should admit that "columns" from the same people until they are long past being out of ideas are superfluous in the internet age, and keep the opinionated stuff to the magazine long-form investigative piece (like the magazine).

Basically keep the emotions at a minimum by maintaining an attention-span-requiring vs outrage-unleashing trade-off.

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#37
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the story? NYT newsroom is bigger than ever, it has more cash than ever and has increased it's amount of subscribers several-fold

It will be interesting to see how they do once Trump is gone. As the article mentions, Trump's presidency was very good for their subscriptions.

I often wonder if they suspected a Trump victory would boost their subscriptions and let that influence their behavior in 2016.

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#38
post #34

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Did you read the story? NYT newsroom is bigger than ever, it has more cash than ever and has increased it's amount of subscribers several-fold

It will be interesting to see how they do once Trump is gone. As the article mentions, Trump's presidency was very good for their subscriptions.

[deleted]

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#39

I still highly respect NYT but I agree that the tone of its headlines (if not the actual article text) in general has gotten more sensationalized over time. I now read both NYT and the news section of WSJ to get a more balanced perspective (I steer clear of the opinion section of WSJ because it's a total dumpster fire).

If you're ever looking to absolutely lose all faith in humanity the journal's comment section is even better than facebook. Never thought I'd see the day where someone unironically says "LIBERAL NOONAN"

Re: Times Change: Inside the New York Times’ Heated Reckoning With Itself

#40

Oh the circumlocutions of woke centrists... NYT's slant is currently ammo for "class reductionists"[1], but if they were to enage in some of the dirtbag left stuff of the sort that Putin likes to sponsor, they could make the MSNBC Moms uncomfortable from both sides of the political spectrum (!), and antipodal-ly restore some bipartisan credibility. [1]: https://www.salon.com/2020/07/25/how-calling-someone-a-class...…

Wait Putin sponsors Chapo Trap House? Does that mean I can’t play Disco Elysium guilt-free anymore?
Post reply on HN