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

51–60 of 175 posts

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#51

Post by rsingel »

darkhorse222 wrote: post #40
luma wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 o…

And the NYT only published when Risen's book was going to come out, meaning the reporting that they paid for was going to get published in a book and embarrass the hell out of them

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#52

Post by dmix »

chneu wrote: post #44
dmix wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I'm not saying I disagree, but please see how dangerous your thinking can be. That basically takes away a major tool of journalists and allows you to paint whoever you disagree with as wrong simply because they don't wish to go public. Very, very dangerous way of thinking. Allowing sourcesto stay anonymous is a major tool for journalists.

An anonymous source from a whistleblower: practical and understandable. Anonymous sources from gov officials that just tows an established useful line that benefits them: way, way too common.

I'm a daily reader of NYT and I can't count the number of times I see them use it each year. It's become standard practice enough to not be just some edge case to protect people.

It's like how the government classifies everything because it makes their job easier.

Not knowing the person, agency, level of access, etc behind a quote makes it extremely difficult to take seriously. A ton of trust is being put on NYT that it's not just purposefully fed information or gossip.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#53

Post by realusername »

lordofgibbons wrote: post #31

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…

It's always been a very bad newspaper internationally, we could mention the Irak war cover or the constant attacks of EU countries.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#54

Post by spyspy »

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.

But then you introduce a subscription model and people decry how the good news is paywalled…

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#55

Post by rh4az »

dralley wrote: post #21
4509Hg wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

No it isn't garbage. During the Biden regime they ran every culture war story that was expected from them. During COVID they ran a hardliner policy for two years. Then, when they were told about an imminent policy reversal around December 2021, they suddenly started manufacturing the new consent with questioning if lockdowns hurt school children etc. They had been Iraq hawks, they are Ukraine hawks now. The NYT most…

"Biden regime"

[flagged]

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#56

Post by Scoundreller »

duskwuff wrote: post #16
yawnxyz wrote: post #8

> deepened our understanding of reaching audiences that might otherwise be blocked from accessing our journalism > Users who wish to continue reading Times journalism where their access to the main website may be blocked can do so through WhatsApp or Telegram. https://archive.is/ is still the de-facto way to read NYT articles...

The fact that reading the NYT requires a paid subscription takes away a lot of the value of a Tor service. (Can you even buy a subscription over Tor? I doubt it; it'd be a fraud risk.)

For a while, there was no paywall on NYT over Tor

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#57

Post by Scoundreller »

pogue wrote: post #24
yawnxyz wrote: post #8

> deepened our understanding of reaching audiences that might otherwise be blocked from accessing our journalism > Users who wish to continue reading Times journalism where their access to the main website may be blocked can do so through WhatsApp or Telegram. https://archive.is/ is still the de-facto way to read NYT articles...

Is there an Onion archive.today?

Yes, the tor browser will auto-advise you that a .onion link is available.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#58

Post by tonyhart7 »

monadINtop wrote: post #37
tonyhart7 wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"licking fascist boot every time it" wdym about this???

https://theintercept.com/2024/04/15/nyt-israel-gaza-genocide...

its horrible but again US sending billions to israel every year, I'm not surprise

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#59

Post by michaelt »

dmix wrote: post #38
Lammy wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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.

I don't think "about ten CIA employees were provided Times cover" was a way to funnel CIA info into the NYT - which, as you say, wouldn't need direct employment.

It sounds more like CIA spies wanted to go poking around in foreign countries, interviewing people and photographing things, which being an NYT reporter allowed them to do.

Re: New York Times shut down Tor Onion service

#60

Post by oefrha »

MrMcCall wrote: post #46
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

Seeking the truth and reporting it ALL are two different things. Telling 90% of the truth means telling the least important 90%. The love of money corrupts all but the noblest of people's hearts.

Often times I hear a fairly important piece of negative news about , then look up which MSMs have reported it. Chances are I can find it on CNN, but it’s completely missing from NYT, or only one tangential sentence/paragraph in a related piece. Lying by omission is powerful.
Post reply on HN