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

New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

open.nytimes.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

31–40 of 175 posts

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#31

Post by lordofgibbons »

NYTimes lost any and all credibility when they hired a literal Israeli Military Intelligence propagandist to write the their headline shock inducing piece on 40 beheaded babies, infants in ovens, and mass rape.

These have all been widely been debunked, including by Israeli media. But NYT never retracted their propaganda piece. This gave a free hand for the IDF, with U.S backing, to commit mass murder on an industrial scale in Gaza.

How are they even relevant anymore, and why do people pay to consume literal foreign propaganda? The purpose of the news media is to inform, but these guys are doing the complete opposite.

https://x.com/zei_squirrel/status/1761740292015767736 https://theintercept.com/2024/02/28/new-york-times-anat-schw...

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#32

Post by tonyhart7 »

quickslowdown wrote: post #20
spyspy wrote: post #14

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Disclaimer I worked at NYT but this is just unsubstantiated garbage. Say what you will about the company and journalism as a whole but you’d be hard pressed to find a better group of truth-seekers out there. waves hands at every other “news” outlet

[flagged]

"licking fascist boot every time it"

wdym about this???

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#33

Post by londons_explore »

andreygrehov wrote: post #10
luma wrote: post #4

Journalists speak truth to power, meanwhile the NYT aligns itself with power at every opportunity. For example, they knew the NSA was spying on us but never ran the story to protect GW's chances at reelection. Presumably they didn't want to be seen as anti-establishment with the new powers and are reverting to their time-proven behavior. NYT will lick the boot when presented, same as ever.

The answer is ad revenue. If you go against what your subscribers believe in, you lose money. If you lose money, you might lose your job. If you lose your job, you can't pay your mortgage.

I suspect plenty of government money directly flows to newspapers as part of various campaigns to sway public opinion on certain politically important topics.

Perhaps moreso outside the USA where just a handful of paid articles can sway some topic important for US foreign policy.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#34

Post by davidw »

spyspy wrote: post #14
luma wrote: post #4

Journalists speak truth to power, meanwhile the NYT aligns itself with power at every opportunity. For example, they knew the NSA was spying on us but never ran the story to protect GW's chances at reelection. Presumably they didn't want to be seen as anti-establishment with the new powers and are reverting to their time-proven behavior. NYT will lick the boot when presented, same as ever.

Disclaimer I worked at NYT but this is just unsubstantiated garbage. Say what you will about the company and journalism as a whole but you’d be hard pressed to find a better group of truth-seekers out there. waves hands at every other “news” outlet

I found this story pretty enlightening

https://css.seas.upenn.edu/new-york-times-a-case-study-in-in...

It's certainly not that they come up with outright lies. They have a ton of good people who work there. But there's something rotten higher up in the way they put their finger on the scales.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#36

Post by luma »

starik36 wrote: post #23
luma wrote: post #4

Journalists speak truth to power, meanwhile the NYT aligns itself with power at every opportunity. For example, they knew the NSA was spying on us but never ran the story to protect GW's chances at reelection. Presumably they didn't want to be seen as anti-establishment with the new powers and are reverting to their time-proven behavior. NYT will lick the boot when presented, same as ever.

Your post is nonsense. NYT has endorsed a democrat for every election in recent history. Why would they "protect" GW's chances at reelection??? Endorsements 2024: Kamala Harris (Democrat) 2020: Joe Biden (Democrat) 2016: Hillary Clinton (Democrat) 2012: Barack Obama (Democrat) 2008: Barack Obama (Democrat) 2004: John Kerry (Democrat) 2000: Al Gore (Democrat) 1996: Bill Clinton (Democrat) 1992: Bill Clinton (Democrat)

I take them at their actions, not their empty words. Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_New_York_Times_con...

> In an interview in 2013, [NYT Executive Editor] Keller said that the newspaper had decided not to report the piece after being pressured by the Bush administration

Bush told them not to run the story while he was running for president. As always, the boot was presented and they licked it clean.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#38

Post by dmix »

Lammy wrote: post #15
luma wrote: post #4

Journalists speak truth to power, meanwhile the NYT aligns itself with power at every opportunity. For example, they knew the NSA was spying on us but never ran the story to protect GW's chances at reelection. Presumably they didn't want to be seen as anti-establishment with the new powers and are reverting to their time-proven behavior. NYT will lick the boot when presented, same as ever.

https://www.carlbernstein.com/the-cia-and-the-media-rolling-... “The Agency’s relationship with the Times was by far its most valuable among newspapers, according to CIA officials. From 1950 to 1966, about ten CIA employees were provided Times cover under arrangements approved by the newspaper’s late publisher, Arthur Hays Sulzberger. The cover arrangements were part of a general Times policy—set by Sulzberger—to pro…

You don't need employees anymore just anonymous sources from "government insiders" by journalists who gain social/work credit from being friends with intelligence officials. The quid pro quo is implied and unquestioned because it sells papers. NYT/WSJ/WaPo are the main vectors for that stuff (big journalist outfits get big juicy sources) and they do it proudly.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#40

Post by darkhorse222 »

luma wrote: post #36
starik36 wrote: post #23

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Your post is nonsense. NYT has endorsed a democrat for every election in recent history. Why would they "protect" GW's chances at reelection??? Endorsements 2024: Kamala Harris (Democrat) 2020: Joe Biden (Democrat) 2016: Hillary Clinton (Democrat) 2012: Barack Obama (Democrat) 2008: Barack Obama (Democrat) 2004: John Kerry (Democrat) 2000: Al Gore (Democrat) 1996: Bill Clinton (Democrat) 1992: Bill Clinton (Democrat)

I take them at their actions, not their empty words. Read more: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_New_York_Times_con... > In an interview in 2013, [NYT Executive Editor] Keller said that the newspaper had decided not to report the piece after being pressured by the Bush administration Bush told them not to run the story while he was running for president. As always, the boot was presented and they licked it c…

Your excerpt is a bit misleading, here's a wider cut:

When it published the article, the newspaper reported that it had delayed publication because the George W. Bush White House had argued that publication "could jeopardize continuing investigations and alert would-be terrorists that they might be under scrutiny." The timing of the New York Times story prompted debate, and the Los Angeles Times noted that "critics on the left wondering why the paper waited so long to publish the story and those on the right wondering why it was published at all." Times executive editor Bill Keller denied that the timing of the reporting was linked to any external event, such as the December 2005 Iraqi parliamentary election, the impending publication of Risen's book State of War: The Secret History of the CIA and the Bush Administration, or the then-ongoing debate on Patriot Act reauthorization. Risen and Lichtblau won the Pulitzer Prize for National Reporting in 2006.

In an interview in 2013, Keller said that the newspaper had decided not to report the piece after being pressured by the Bush administration and being advised not to do so by The New York Times Washington bureau chief Philip Taubman, and that "Three years after 9/11, we, as a country, were still under the influence of that trauma, and we, as a newspaper, were not immune."

Post reply on HN