I would like to see more proof for this than just one guy saying he heard it from others. It may very well be true, but it would be far more convincing, to me, if some one with actual direct knowledge commented publicly. Surely, if it was so widespread, and unambiguous, it would not be be difficult to get clear evidence of this directive from NYT leadership.
NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
51–60 of 163 posts
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#52Past comments: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=33459740
[deleted]
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#53Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately the NYT editorial board has become quite political in a way that I don't think journalists should. I finally stopped reading them after their highly biased coverage and openly stated support of the Canadian alt-right occupation of our capital. They had statements in their articles such as "the majority of the funding for the protests came from Canada" when the actual number was 54% came from Canadian so…
> I finally stopped reading them after their highly biased coverage and openly stated support of the Canadian alt-right occupation of our capital. It certainly seems like you wouldn't have any bias when discussing this topic as well. > They had statements in their articles such as "the majority of the funding for the protests came from Canada" when the actual number was 54% came from Canadian sources. Maybe from a st…
I'm not a journalist and my comments are not an attempt to be. On what word to use, I would use "54%" or maybe "roughly half." Either paint an accurate picture to the reader of the reality.
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#54From former journalist Matt Yglesias on Twitter: a few years ago the New York Times made a weird editorial decision with its tech coverage. Instead of covering the industry with a business press lens or a consumer lens they started covering it with a very tough investigative lens — highly oppositional at all times and occasionally unfair. Almost never curious about technology or in awe of progress and potential. This…
> one of the newspapers that I trust the most
One of the newspapers that I ... might possibly occasionally distrust a tiny bit less than some other inaccurate, biased and misrepresentation-laden newspapers and media sources.
I frequently notice major errors and misrepresentations in the NYT and elsewhere, so I can only assume that it's a general property - even in stories where I lack the background information or expertise to identify them immediately.
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#55This should not be a surprise to anyone who has been reading the New York Times' technology journalism for the past several years.
In fact, I'd argue that even before any such "directive" was made, the bias in high-profile papers was already predominantly anti-tech, except in rare circumstances where praising a technology sector or tech company served the overarching political narrative of the moment (e.g., then-nascent social media was a good thing when Obama leveraged it to success; and a toxin when later less palatable politicians did the same).
This is not limited to the New York Times. Even tech-oriented journalistic venues such as The Verge have a decidedly snarky and grim view of many technologies. And they are effective at steering discourse, even among notionally technology-savvy people. Consider, for example, how antagonistic coverage of autonomous transportation by major media outlets has yielded widespread pessimism and doubt. Presently, you have non-trivial numbers of otherwise intelligent technology-forward journalism consumers convinced that autonomy is an unsolvable problem.
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#56It's wild that HN, forum that seems disproportionately in favor of unregulated speech should feel uncomfortable when a newspaper chooses a critical editorial stance. You agree that, by your own lights , editorial stances of newspapers are none of your business, yes? Free speech, yes? Everyone says 'both sides' but that's not actually the case, is it? Shoe, meet other foot. [EDIT]: typos removed
I don't think anyone here is calling for the government to restrict the NYT's editorial tone. They're saying that this behaviour is unbecoming of a newspaper of the NYT's reputation, and that their trust in this institution has been damaged as a result.
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#57I don't get why this seems like a big deal or a negative thing. Why wouldn't you want reporters to be critical? Isn't that like the whole point. That's even why we have freedom of press in the 1st amendment, so journalists can be critical.
I think the tech page used to look more like the travel page today
https://www.nytimes.com/section/travel
If you take a look, its not doing investigations. Its just talking about cool places. Tech used to just be talking about cool gadgets.
I believe them when they say it was "top down" but also it was self-evident that this would happen if tech companies went to a small part of the economy to the biggest in the world.
You can talk about the rivalries between NYTimes and FB/Twitter - but ultimately it just seems like they decided to treat it like a serious matter which was predictable/good. If overnight the airline and hotel companies became the most powerful in the world, then I think the travel section would be more critical and it would have nothing to do with NYT trying to get revenge.
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#58Not sure that this is entirely a bad thing. I would read any glowing article about a tech company suspiciously (was it a paid placement?)
I wonder though if this was fallout from the media's fawning coverage of Holmes pre-Carreyeou, and Facebook's fall from grace with the Cambridge Analytica story.
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#59Former NYT writer here.... NYT, as far as I know, has always had a "top-down" directive that coverage be critical. That's, you know, the job of journalism and all. Non-critical pieces are opinion, not reporting.
Re: NYT reporters had a top-down directive that tech coverage should be critical
#60Journalism is supposed to be critical, no? Otherwise it is just rehashed press releases.