Cancel The New York Times
robrhinehart.com
Cancel The New York Times
1–10 of 63 posts
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#2Writing may cost you nothing, but editing should be paid for.
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#3See https://www.amazon.com/Powers-That-Be-David-Halberstam/dp/02... for something more "fair and balanced".
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#4[deleted]
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#5>I see it now. I see that information and truth and freedom have been oppressed. I had been silenced. We had all been bound and gagged and silenced, not directly, but indirectly, by a strange, complex, invisible, sinister force. But I see it now. I see it so clearly. There was a "guild of truth" telling us that there was a central narrative of mankind. Truth was branded. We are all being controlled and oppressed and enslaved by the evil octopus of the New York Times.
That is true, but it reaches far beyond the NYT. It is pervasive and it has a name. It's called "Cancel Culture". It is a social disease of unapologetic censorship that affects any and all civil discourse and is a form of social cancer.
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#6So his "original thought", so important that he is braving all the evil backlash of people on Twitter, is that the New York Times isn't perfect. His mind is so liberated that he is borrowing the "cancel culture" and "the New York Times is literally Pravda" memes right off of Tucker Carlson.
Dreck.
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#7>I see it now. I see that information and truth and freedom have been oppressed. I had been silenced. We had all been bound and gagged and silenced, not directly, but indirectly, by a strange, complex, invisible, sinister force. But I see it now. I see it so clearly. There was a "guild of truth" telling us that there was a central narrative of mankind. Truth was branded. We are all being controlled and oppressed and…
It's just an extension of that other social disease called "culture". Bullying and excluding people for saying uncool things has always happened at a small local scale, and people mostly adapted by keeping their mouths shut.
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#8I'm hoping someone can succinctly explain the hate for the NYT. Didn't get it before, don't get it now. It seems perfectly adequate. Same goes for WSJ, FT, the Economist, WaPo, etc.
>I see it now. I see that information and truth and freedom have been oppressed. I had been silenced. We had all been bound and gagged and silenced, not directly, but indirectly, by a strange, complex, invisible, sinister force. But I see it now. I see it so clearly. There was a "guild of truth" telling us that there was a central narrative of mankind. Truth was branded. We are all being controlled and oppressed and enslaved by the evil octopus of the New York Times.
This I especially don't get. No one has declared themselves the "guild of truth", and there's no paper or institution I can think of that the people have declared to be the "guild of truth". And if someone has, saying so doesn't make it true. But people not liking you, or your writing, isn't a crime.
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#9I'm hoping someone can succinctly explain the hate for the NYT. Didn't get it before, don't get it now. It seems perfectly adequate. Same goes for WSJ, FT, the Economist, WaPo, etc. >I see it now. I see that information and truth and freedom have been oppressed. I had been silenced. We had all been bound and gagged and silenced, not directly, but indirectly, by a strange, complex, invisible, sinister force. But I see…
Googling [why does rob rhinehart hate the new york times] yielded https://www.vice.com/en/article/epd4je/soylent-founders-unhi...
Re: Cancel The New York Times
#10As a Non-American, I don't understand the hatred that is found in the article.
I understand the author making the point/assumption that the New York Times, due to its large influence in the United States, has a pervasive sway in public opinion that goes further than just New York City.
However I don't understand why that would be a bad thing, if it's not a monopoly?
To take a more extreme example, there are bureaus in countries like North Korea (country wide news monopoly) or China (less brutal but monopoly nevertheless by the State) dedicated to controlling the narrative that goes on within the country. Anything that goes out of line is suppressed.
Is the author comparing NYT to that kind of control over the narrative?
If that is not the case, then personally I see how a combination of "free market economy" and "freedom of speech" would mean the ones with resources (power and money) will undubitably have a larger sway in public opinion. That's inherent in the system.