Death of the New York Times - Raw Story

[erronis]

I don't often refer to Raw Story but this commentary by D. Earl Stephens is well worth a read.

https://www.rawstory.com/new-york-times-2666238128/

After being a loyal reader for the better part of 60 years, I have officially run out of respect for The New York Times.

I have come to the grudging realization that this newspaper is actively playing a part in undermining our Democracy by convening a political horse race, and backing a burnt-orange, reprehensible, racist traitor, and his dirty trainers, who mean our country harm.

I believe they are doing this because they have lost their way and their morals, and have carefully dug out a tributary that flows from the obscene river of cash that is currently poisoning our politics, and runs directly into the bottomless pockets of the broken decision-makers whose fat asses are comfortably stuffed in the chairs of their front offices.

Unrest and instability might be bad for our Democracy, but they are damn good for business at The New York Times.

I take no pride in writing what I believe is this necessary piece.

I have been a steady reader of the “Gray Lady” for most of my life. Growing up in New Jersey, I actually aspired to work at the place as a starry-eyed kid, who pedaled his bike around delivering newspapers after school each day.

That never happened, and mostly by design. It turns out I got far more of a thrill working for smaller, underdog newspapers that stood up for their readers, called power to account, and strived to make a real difference in their communities.

Still, I never lost my respect for The Times — until now.

...

Every day — hell, every HOUR — Republicans are doing something to undermine our Democratic Republic here in America, whether it be squashing voting rights, refusing to certify elections, threatening DOJ officials, flat lying about the results of these elections, supporting dictators around the world, banning books detailing our nation’s choppy history, all of the above, and more.

It never ends. There is no bigger overarching story in America right now than Republicans’ surge toward fascism.

WHY isn’t this being given the editorial weight it deserves?

I’ve said it many times and I’ll say it again right here: If the Republicans are successful in taking down our Democracy and installing an authoritarian regime in Washington, one of the very first things to go will be our freedom of the press, and THEN where will The Times be?

[SalamanderSleeps]

1. Spooling through their headlines is like listening to a horror film trailer.

They treat Democrats with disdain while acting like everything the Red Menace does is hunky dory.

Oh, but their style section is divine.

Nasty little fuckers seem to have adopted the "Murdock Model."

[Martin68]

23. I just spooled through the NYT's Opinion Pages. The headlines I saw refute your characterization. These are all verbatum

The New Republican Party Isn’t Ready for the Post-Roe World

In Israel, Chris Christie said Donald Trump’s rhetoric fueled the surge of bigotry confronting Jews and Muslims.

The Conservative Supreme Court Vision That Means Inequality for Women

Kelly Johnson Embodies the Hard-Line Views She Shares With the House Speaker

A Trump-Biden Rematch Is the Election We Need (

I’m a Pollster. Democrats Need Young Voters to Win in 2024.

Why Does the Right Hate America?

Republicans Have Chosen Nihilism

‘MAGA Mike Johnson’ and Our Broken Christian Politics

Biden Can’t Stop Immigration. Time to Embrace It.

I Grew Up in Mike Johnson’s District, Where Kindness Can Mask Cruelty

Mike Johnson Just Confirmed How Unserious He Is

The Republicans Who Want to Invade Mexico

America’s Rifle Fetish Is Destroying Its Sense of Freedom

Joe Biden Knows What He’s Doing

Jenna Ellis Could Become a Star Witness Against Trump

Mike Johnson Is a Right-Wing Fever Dream Come to Life

The G.O.P. Goes Full-On Extremist

Millennials and Gen Z Are Tilting Left and Staying There

How the Right’s Purity Tests Are Haunting the House G.O.P.

The People Who Broke the House

[Retrograde]

29. And today's Opinion section

had an article on Matthew Perry and a fawning piece on Sophia Coppola.

And then there's Trump's main sycophant, Maggie Haberman, who gets at least a column a week

[Martin68]

34. If you aren't interested in the opposition's views, don't read them. There is more than enough positive coverage of

Democrats and negative coverage of Trumpists. I think you are way too sensitive to views you disagree with. Are you afraid intelligent voters can’t distinguish between them? I like to know what the other side is thinking without being deluged by nothing but that. That is the job of good journalism and a responsible press. You sound like you want the NYT and the WaPo to be Fox News in reverse.

[sop]

2. "No bigger overarching story in America right now than Republicans' surge toward fascism."

[Farmer-Rick]

3. It needed to be said.

I think they like to play around with their support of democracy. They are pro democracy in most of their stories. But they definitely don't point out fascism is the alternative to voting Democratic.

They avoid the elephant of fascism in the campaigns of the GOP and publish mostly fact based news. Most the conspiracies of the right-wing don't leak over to the NYT.

But they don't stand up for democracy. They don't stand up and warn us of the dangers of the GOP.

And then they publish an obvious GOP support story. They think they have you fooled into believing they are progressive and then they throw out a humdinger of a pro-fascist poll or story or spin on a fact. They even take up the mantel of war when the war is nothing but an oil grab and a political maneuver.

Take each story in the NYT with a grain of salt. Do not assume their slant is pro democracy.

[Scruffy1]

4. It's been dead to me for a long, long, time.

Anybody who hasn't figured this out hasn't been paying attention. The firing of Chris Hayes for telling the truth about the Iraq invasion
was just one in a long line of journalistic malfeasance to kiss some right wing ass.

[PortTack]

22. Same!

[Magoo48]

5. Corporate media coverage is censored.

I’m confounded by the lack of widespread emphasis on the right’s headlong rush into fascism and their dystopian view future. Why this state of affairs doesn’t receive more attention in media still free to write without the corporate collar is a mystery.

[peppertree]

7. It's because it's what Wall Street and the MIC want (with exceptions)

And Big Media, as you know, is more or less beholden to them.

[Magoo48]

14. Yup

[Martin68]

35. Bullshit. I don't know what you're reading, but I do know what you're missing and not reading.

I’m fully informed of the fascist plans of the Trumpists by both the WaPo and the NYT on a daily basis. This all sounds rather hysterical to me.

[GiqueCee]

6. Superb...

... and insightful. The American oligarchs simply cannot be content to be obscenely rich. The greed and malice that got them where they are today can never be satisfied – just look at the Koch horde of invasive organizations, or Murdoch's Pox News – and when there's no one who dares to say, "NO!" to them, their innate belief that they are, indeed, gods, and are thus, free to impose their will on others. Perverting once respected newspapers, and any other news sources through enticement or hostile takeovers, is but one of the ways in which they ensure that their message, and no other, is disseminated.
And the Great Unwashed just loves them some nasty nooze.

(edited for a tiny spelling error)

[RandomNumbers]

8. "obscene river of cash that is currently poisoning our politics" - Nailed it

That is really where all this awfulness starts.

Some things were awful before, but they had the hope of getting better as people got educated. Now it is in the best interests of the "obscene river" sources to make and keep people dumber.

[Bernardo de La Paz]

9. What he writes applies WIDELY to mass media in general. . . . nt

[LymphocyteLover]

10. also please read this Will Bunch piece on the same topic

https://www.inquirer.com/opinion/commentary/journalism-free-press-gaza-extremism-20231105.html

"There was a shocking and incredibly important story on the front page of the New York Times last week. As reported by an A-team of journalists including two Pulitzer Prize winners, the Times warned its readers that Donald Trump — if returned to the White House in 2025 — is grooming a new team of extremist government lawyers who would be more loyal to their Dear Leader than to the rule of law, and could help Trump install a brand of American fascism.

You say you didn’t hear anything about this? That’s not surprising. The editors at the Times made sure to present this major report in the blandest, most inoffensive way possible — staying true to the mantra in the nation’s most influential newsroom that the 2024 election shouldn’t be covered any differently, even when U.S. democracy is on the line.

“Trump Allies Want a New Style of Lawyer if He Returns to Power” was the original online headline for the piece, as if maybe they were talking about colorful drawling Southerners with seersucker suits, rather than rabid-dog ideologues who would do the dirty work of overturning an election that career government attorneys refused to do before Jan. 6, 2021.

That “new style of lawyer” — pro-Trump, “America First” zealots who think the ultraconservative lawyers bred in the Federalist Society are too soft to carry out their leader’s autocratic call for a “final battle” against traditional democratic governance that he calls “the deep state” — was described, numbingly, by the Times as “more aggressive legal gatekeepers.” Their dangerous antidemocratic mission was blandly outlined as a plan to “take control of the government in a way unseen in presidential history.”

[sop]

17. Many of Trump's lawyers from his first term are now under indictment, or have plea bargained to

avoid prison time. Given that Barr and his Federalist Society bunch weren't sufficiently aggressive gate-keepers, Trump will have to find even more radical lawyers in 2025. One has to wonder where Trump's new legal goons will come from?

[erronis]

18. Didn't the current Speaker Of The House have xian law school

at least on paper. Seems like those types of places Liberty, PragerU could print diplomas as well as any others.

[LymphocyteLover]

27. I'm sure there are some rightwing quack lawyers still out there

but are there many rightwing quack lawyers that are competent at practicing law? Seems hard to believe.

[The Unmitigated Gall]

11. Walked away from NYT in the Iraq/Judith Miller days.

Never looked back.

[bullimiami]

12. ""THEN where will The Times be?"" PRAVDA. As long as they tow the line hard enough.

[yardwork]

13. They don't believe it will happen.

I've met some of the leaders of major publications. They think Trump is hilarious. They don't believe anything will change their world very much. They are literally insulated in their bubbles. It's terrifying, really. They are clueless and they run the news.

[shrike3]

15. You got it. That's exactly it.

They don't think it'll happen to them.

They also aren't real fond of Biden. New bio says as much.

[Retrograde]

30. They don't know peope like Biden

Biden comes from a working class background, didn't go to the "best" schools and make the contacts to ease his way into the elite world, lived in Delaware rather than DC (he even commuted - on public transit, no less!), has a wife who's worked at a real job (rather than being a board member or consultant or commentator or some other position she got through connections) - I don't think the people who run the Times and most of the media can comprehend his background.

[shrike3]

33. Great point. Never thought of it that way.

[shrike3]

16. The press also likes to be entertained.

I cannot find the exact quote. It's from prehistoric days, Bush v. Gore. But Margaret Carlson, on MSNBC recently, said, and I'm paraphrasing, "We could get out our calculators (and go after Bush.) But it's so much more fun and entertaining for us to go after Gore."

Then there's this, from 2021. https://www.forbes.com/sites/andymeek/2021/07/17/journalists-keep-complaining-biden-is-too-boring-translation-trump-is-more-fun-to-write-about/?sh=523fec226f98

Still, much more illuminating than all of this are the anonymous comments that some journalists shared recently with Julia Ioffe, which she recounts in a recent installment of her fantastic newsletter Tomorrow Will Be Worse. Some excerpts from this particular edition:

“The mechanics of reporting have changed so much,” one reporter told Ioffe. “It was just this really aberrant period in which you could almost guarantee that, with enough effort, you could find out what’s going on in the Situation Room. Now you can’t — and it’s infuriating.”

“I mean, it wasn’t just the fact that Trump was a gravy train. It’s also juxtaposed (against) the most boring administration in modern history. You go from a circus with flaming chainsaws to … what? An old man watching his dog?”

“I loved covering Trump. It was a great and fascinating story. It wasn’t just about him; it was about his movement and the institutions and America. The story was always so dramatic and had these larger than life characters. The stakes often felt very high. I like covering Biden, too, but it just doesn’t feel as dramatic.”

I really miss Eric Boehlert, btw.

https://pressrun.media/p/the-media-lash-out-at-boring-biden#details

More proof of the media’s contempt for Biden, and their resentment for his No Drama approach, was found in a recent newsletter by D.C. journalist Julia Ioffe, who explored how journalists are reacting to the new Democratic administration, in the wake of the Trump media circus.

“People you’ve likely read or heard of or watched were concerned about what a Trump loss would mean for their career. That was the talk of the town,” she wrote.

snip

Journalists are quietly seething at the Biden White House. “Kudos to them, they’re very happy with themselves” one anonymous journalist told Ioffe. “You can see it, the coverage across the board from everyone is very, very lame. You never get inside the room and hear how this shit’s going down. Like, how are they managing this elderly man?”

Added another, “There’s a sense that Biden’s position is fragile and that he has to be protected, that any unkind gaze might knock him over—which plays into every right-wing stereotype.”

And a third: “I don’t know that there’s been a president who’s been so protected and wrapped in so many layers of wool to keep him away from anything remotely approaching an adversarial interview.” Another journalist belittled Biden as “an old man watching his dog.”

Oh, how they miss the Orange One.

[erronis]

19. Wow. I really don't know how to take Boehlert's piece - irony or reality

or self-criticism. It doesn't paint a very pleasant picture of the press that hovers around "important" people.

I didn't know that he passed. Fascinating and talented person.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Eric_Boehlert

[shrike3]

20. Take it as reality.

I worked in media, though not at the elite level. People on the lower levels are exactly as he describes. I can't imagine the elite are much different.

Boehlert was a loss.

[kimbutgar]

21. I no longer view NYT as a reliable news source

It’s as if Robert Murdoch is a private investor behind the scenes. It’s anti Biden now no longer a source I would read without skepticism. They love the orange maggot and repukes. Even USA Today is more middle of the road.

[BigmanPigman]

24. Yup. I canceled it 3 weeks ago

I wanted to for a while but when they continue to report issues and events incorrectly and don't admit it then I finally got off my ass and have had enough.

It took 4 phone calls over 3 days but I finally got it canceled (their computers denied I was paying for their services until I sent them a screenshot of my bill and subscription). What a scam.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

25. I ignore the NYT ever since their campaign of "clouds and shadows" against Hillary.

[Aussie105]

26. Could it be that the NYT . . .

is catering to both sides, and relying on people to read what they support and ignore the stuff that they don't?

That way they can claim to be 'balanced' and 'impartial'.

Just trying to keep the eyeball numbers up.

In reality, they are turning people away.

[erronis]

28. I think that's where they are falling/failing. Trying to please both sides

with too much stuff thrown out there to be reliable as a source.

An editorial staff should not play this game - pleasing the readers and pleasing the big-money players. They should decide on what needs to be reported - good or bad - and get the real news out there.

Lots of discussion in many other forums on how they are failing. WaPo falling in behind.

[Skittles]

32. they shouldn't be "CATERING" to ANY "side"

they should be REPORTING THE NEWS

[LittleGirl]

31. Our subscription was paused

and hubby tried to cancel it while it was paused. Nope. Can't do that.
So as soon as he reactivated it, it charged our credit card. Then he could go through and cancel it but it forced us to pay for another month before we could cancel it completely. Totally cruel and unfair. I begged him to cancel it this past year for the reasons you've stated in your OP.