The New York Times today published what it professes is The Great Summing Up of the horrors likely to be visited upon us by a second term of Donald Trump in the White House. The Washington Post did this story before, in early November: “Trump and allies plot revenge, Justice Department control in a second term.” Now the Times has come along with, ”How Trump Plans to Wield Power in 2025: What We Know.” Both stories discuss Trump’s plans to “go after” the Biden family and his other political opponents, but the Times story does it as if this is actually news on December 26, 2023.
I’ll tell you what alarms me, and I’m not kidding: reporting like this that makes Trump’s win seem inevitable. No matter how you lay out the horrors, indifferent and malleable and non-analytical people can be swayed by reporting like this and think, what the hell, I’m reading and hearing that he’s already won, so I’ll vote for him. He’s being awarded the subtle cachet of the (real or apparent)winner. There’s no way to stop it. No way in hell. The news is a business and Trump sells. But if Trump were to win— god forbid, a thousand times god forbid— the way he was covered this year and next may be studied in journalism schools one day as a case study about how a perfectly decent, highly experienced, liberal president was defeated by a twice impeached, four times indicted scammer and liar simply because major news media unwittingly elevated the latter with constant coverage and carried long, detailed stories that made his presidency, horrors and all, seem inevitable. May it please god, or George Carlin’s invisible man in the sky, or whoever is up there, that I be wrong.
Exactly. WaPo proclaims that "Democracy dies in darkness" and then publishes Robert Kagan's piece that says just what you laid out on your first sentence. If there are future case studies, I hope they detail, point by point, how we were failed by our news media.
Hear. Hear. You definitely said what needed to be said. And it does need to be said over and over again. The constant subliminal media coverage that paints *Rump as inevitable has me so disgusted that I can no longer read any of it. It is so damn obvious that they can’t not know they’re doing it.
You mean the inevitable aftermath of the Hamas Terror State siting their missile platforms and other military infrastructure in civilian areas and launching indiscriminate genocidal attacks on civilians in Israel?
Launched and targeted from schools, apartment buildings, shopping centers, mosques, hospitals, libraries....wait, strike that, Hamas doesn't allow those - civilian-owned properties of all kinds, though.
The law of armed conflict is very clear: the victims (the Israelis, for example, those massacred on October 7, and those kidnapped) can rely on their state to engage in proportional self defense measures until the threat is eliminated, which Hamas could solve immediately by surrender, releasing all captives, and cooperating with the war crimes investigations.
So the main argument turns on what is "proportional," here ya go:
And I must note proleptically, I have next to no respect for The Daily Caller, but that's distinguishable as a platform from speech afforded to S. Bryen to make these lucid arguments - refute them if you can, I am willing to listen to dissent, it's what I do, Gudrun - keep an open mind. I seriously doubt you'll have any cogent, relevant, non-tendentious refutations, but go ahead and give it your best shot!
Excerpt:
"As the Israeli incursion into Gaza continues, increased attention has been focused on the notion of “proportionality” in both the number of casualties on each side and the sophistication of weapons each side brings to bear. Mostly, pundits mean that Israel is killing too many Palestinians. An understanding of proportionality in the laws of war, however, has been missing.
Even friends of Israel get it wrong – one irate speaker on British television said, “Do you want proportionality? Should Israel seek out young women in Gaza, rape, torture, and kill them? Should Israel find babies and murder them in front of their parents – or murder parents in front of their children? Should Israel indiscriminately shell Palestinian villages?”
An Israeli journalist, in a prior response to Hamas missiles, went so far as to call Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system “unsportsmanlike.” He wondered what FIFA would say “if Germany, with its superior economy and industry, were to replace Manuel Neuer with a bionic goalkeeper… capable of calculating where each Argentine ball will come from, the exact position to stand in, and amount of force needed to block it… On the modern battlefield (Israel) is a bionic Germany.” (RELATED: JD FOSTER: The Three Big Questions Israel Must Ask Before The Ground Invasion)
How unsportsmanlike!
Then there is the “yes, but…” response. “Yes” Hamas started it; “Yes,” Hamas tortured and massacred Israeli civilians; “Yes” Hamas puts military infrastructure in civilian neighborhoods; “Yes” Israel is entitled to self-defense; “Yes” the Israelis warn Palestinians. “But” so many more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis.
Isn’t that the definition of “disproportionate?” No. It isn’t.
Proportionality in international law is not about equality of death or civilian suffering, or even about firepower returned being equal in sophistication or lethality to firepower received. Proportionality weighs the military necessity of an action against the suffering that the action might cause to enemy civilians in the vicinity. A review of expert opinion – none of which was written in relation to Israel – helps to clarify. And each should be read in relation to Hamas crimes against Israeli civilians."
****** The article continues with the relevant citations.
Yes, and they are nothing if not fungible. They’re a snapshot. Quick opinions. Haley is up to 29% in New Hampshire among “likely voters in the primary.” A few weeks ago she was in the single digits.
To your point that this will, one day, be studied in journalism schools...
I agree that the main story will be that the proper function of a free press in a democratic society was undermined by its evolution as a business and by its business models. I don't know about the Times or print media, but I'll share a perspective from working in consumer insights departments for broadcast and cable news.
I can tell you decision making is short term. Ratings reports are issued daily, and a few bad weeks could have the group I worked in scurrying to set up surveys and focus groups.
It is siloed. We had no contact with journalists, just briefings with senior producers. For the most part, our reports went up one side of the org and came down the other.
It is driven by considerations other than news. For example, early in the Trump era, local affiliates in Trump country were going bananas because the liberal perception of the national evening news was affecting their evening schedules. There is also the pablum of morning news which is a huge revenue generator and easily undermined by political polarization.
Not only is the news function often hostage to more revenue generating entertainment functions but these companies are sometimes owned by conglomerates that are in different businesses altogether. Which raises the focus on bottom lines.
Cable news is a different game from broadcast. Instead of living off as broad an audience as possible, ratings are maximized by a deeply devoted audience that consumes as many hours of the 24 as possible. Fox News is a master of this game; we would look in awe at the amount of consumption they got from their audience. But even working on the liberal side, we noted how weak ratings were during the Obama years, "no drama Obama" and how they spiked, and audience involvement rose when Trump came along. Boy, Trump is terrible (but also, kind of good for business). I wonder about this when I see press treatment of Biden.
In my job, it was ok to complain to my manager that, ratings aside, we want to be on the right side of history and a fascist government is actually, in the long term, bad for the news business. Some shadow of this argument could make it into the reports and managers immediately above us would be sympathetic, but my guess is that side of the argument doesn't make it very far up the line.
Fascinating and valuable insights into the internal workings of a media organization. The Brits understand the power of broadcast media and they know the crucial importance of impartiality with those influential voices. What we need is something like the BBC, but would that ever happen in this country, with its worship of the almighty dollar? No way.
What makes your spot on commentary even more frightening is that the near criminal malfeasance of NYT is not the spectre if the less than educated saying "what the hell, he's already won, I might as well vote for him", but the more blase` percentage of the Loyal Opponent who start to think " my vote won't matter", so they stay home in droves, thus giving him a victory of sorts and dooming the Republic.
Lucian, you expressed everything I felt when I read that article. The authors do deem themselves as “trump whisperers”, like they have a secret code to get the goods before any of us or anyone else does. Whoop-Dee-doo! Give them a prize. NOT!
Stephen Miller is not only an Eichmann look-alike but has adopted his meanness. He and the Heritage Foundation guys with their bullshit Project 2025, can shove those over 900 pages right up their white asses! We cannot ignore them, but we must beat them at every turn. And Lucian, I hope you send tonight’s column to NYT. They need to hear from you, not just from us.
I agree! Send it Lucian!! Since when did the NYT come out on the side of P01135890?? Do they want him to win?? If so, why?? The press is the enemy of the people, remember?? I do not understand!
"Hmm, welcome to my office here, settle in and we'll discuss our advertising sales position."
"No, no, don't apologize for being here early, we value that kind of gumption, it fits with our mission as the world's finest newspaper and online news media outlet going!
Ms. Stearns, let me cut to the chase, we here at the New York Times believe ad sales are the very life-blood, the beating heart of our enterprise to print all the news that fits what sells ads...er, excuse me, all the news we confuse for truths... wait, wait, I'll think of it, Ms. Stearns, this isn't my normal job here, you understand, but Mr. Periwinkle ran off to Tahiti last Friday, left a note saying he was going to join the French Foreign Legion and was very sorry, but he couldn't make it into work today...."
"What? No, he might be back but I doubt it, so you're getting in at a good time, hiring-wise.
I mean, what can you do with a guy like that, pressure too much for him, that's the fourth one this quarter, so you have a great shot at replacing Periwinkle if you play your cards right, sales-wise, know what I mean?"
"Why did he quit so suddenly? Oh who knows, some of us just aren't cut out for amoral money-mad careers, no, that didn't come out right, I know, it was his wife's fault, that's the rumor anyway, you've probably heard of her?
No? Persephone Melpomene Romney Periwinkle, the performance artist? Jumps in front of subway trains and speeding cabs while her assistant films the crowd reaction? Real gutsy broa, er, lady, lady down to her fingertips, anyway, she was too much for ole Perrier Water, I mean Periwinkle, I guess.
Wait, Ms. Stearns, don't leave, you're perfect for the job, I read your resume, Janice, may I call you Janice? Just give us a chance, you'll like it here, very casual as long as you sell ads, lots and lots of ads, ah, now she's gone..."
"Miss Boebert, put down that phone and stop yakking to your mom, yes, I know she's in Congress and I'm not, and stop popping that bubble gum, it's very unseemly - just send in the next one....
Mr. Heep? Mr. Uriah Heep, how nice of you to arrive on time, welcome, welcome to the New York Times...Look, the job's yours, I'm booking the next available flight to Tahiti, just tell little Miss Boebert there you're in charge, ok? Fine, fine, you'll fit right in!"
Those monsters piss me off. Miller and his ilk hide behind the Constitution as they spread their evil, and then plan to destroy it once they "take power'. You're damn right we have to beat them at every turn. The Heritage Foundation needs to be demolished.
I cancelled my NYT on-line account that is effective 1-9-24.I could no longer abide by their continued beating the Trump drum by normalizing him, by Biden-berating, by unrelenting ageism against our POTUS.I am still so angry at them and other msm that delivered Trump to us on a ratings bonanza platter, propping him up every damn day with a giant helping of”But her e-mails”.I am still wondering if I should have kept my NYT thing to know what they will be saying in 2024.I will be paying attention to other media and to the many wonderful wordsmiths out there now,Lucian thankfully among them.
I have been threatening to do this(cancelling) for some time.This organization has been part and parcel for why we got Trump in 2016 and why we ALMOST got him in 2020 and they are continuing it to this day.This dangerous journalism turns me so off.Buh-bye NYT.
You can Google Wordle and Spelling Bee and play for free. Spelling Bee allows you to also play Connections,Tiles and Letter Boxed without a paid subscription.
I have ten free articles a month. I’ll send them all to you if you wish....I read very selectively. Some journalists are quite good, but the editorial board stinks.
Written with poison darts properly aimed. I'm not sure what happened to the former "Paper of record," or why, but that sound you hear is Ochses and Sulzbergers rolling around in their graves. Family members still run it, but the direction wasn't supposed to be into the ground. The blood thins, however, and it's true what they say about generational diminution.
Re the "news" of "the likelihood that Trump will pull the U.S. out of NATO," I remember Lardass saying that when he was still president, so that bulletin is maybe four or five years old.
Trump's plans have by now, to quote Leon Wieseltier, achieved fortune cookie status, and thinking people no longer pay attention.
As for "ass-coveryish," it is my new favorite original word.
Fortune cookie status. That was the point I was trying to make in my long comment above about what alarms me. The analogy makes the point that we humans internalize and blithely accept as true almost anything if it’s said loudly enough and often enough. Hitler knew this, famously saying that people may not believe the little lies but they’ll believe the big ones.
Forgive the grotesque parenthetical. It was meant to read: “as my mother would have said if I wore white...” The gremlins are either inside my iPad or my brain. My mother left us looooong ago.
Why is the NYT so obtuse?? Is it management? Is it the editors? Is it the reporters? Is it the both-sides obsession of too much journalism? They live in the same world I do, and they have access to much more information. I really don't get it.
While you've completely nailed the "what" of this situation the "why" of if it still has me shaking my head till it hurts. Surely the NYT isn't worried about losing readership among the MAGA crowd, who wouldn't be caught dead reading it or even using it to wrap up their wet garbage. Do they think they're going to be immune when Donny Dictator bans independent media all together?
I agree. Tracy asked me right after she read the column (and edited it, as she does every day) why the Times went into the tank for Trump way back in 2016 and why now. A column for another day.
Can't wait to read your take. All I can come up with is "both-sides-ism run amok". OK, there could be some genetic susceptibility in the Sulzberger family tree, because it's weird that billionaire-owned WaPo is doing (marginally) better than the NYT when "family-owned for generations" is supposed to be a plus.
I’m so sick and tired of the Gray Lady’s incompetence in covering politics. Bleech. I’d cancel my subscription were it not for the games and cooking apps.
I'm not sure I would call it incompetence. There's a certain glee to the coverage that belies darker motivations, for example, personal notoriety. Haberman, in particular, seems to rush out stories designed mostly to enable her ubiquitous appearances on cable news networks. If she spent as much time on her reporting as she does on the tee-vee, perhaps we would see less of these dubious click-bait column inches, often riddled with inaccuracies and noncommittal equivocation meant to somehow portray gravitas.
In the good ole days, the Gray Lady would not tolerate such nonsense (see Judith "there's WMD in them thar hills" Miller). She has clearly rounded a bend that puts democracy in danger, with no shame whatsoever.
Apparently you, Lucian, and most of your readers, aren't noticing that the Times has changed its catchy slogan from "All the news that's fit to print" to "All the news because we say it is." My "sources" tell *me* that BMW lawyers stopped the Times from using "The ultimate flacking machine." There was one unintentionally gorgeous (yes, yes, venomous tongue in cheek) quote in that Times piece. Two "top" Trump campaign officials, unnamed, of course, issued a statement trying to defuse anger over Project 2025's plans for Mar-a-Dachau and all the rest of those policy positions by saying they are "theoretical." Uh-huh. The extreme policy positions described in a book published by Franz Eher Verlag on July 18, 1925, titled "Mein Kampf," were also "theoretical." Until they weren't.
It is hard to believe how much they have helped Trump since 2015. I used to believe that it was bad reporting, but now it appears that it is intentional.
The Atlantic's Jan/Feb 2024 issue, around the house for about two weeks, therefore closed end of November, consists entirely of 24 illustrious bylines on the cover topic: "If Trump Wins." No dispatches from the Times' press room at Mar a Lago, though.
I know, I haven't read it either. The magazine follows me up and down the stairs, and where real men do their reading sitting down, but I haven't got the nerve, or the enthusiasm, or masochistic fascination, to read it either.
Agreed. I'm tired of the "predictions" which have an appearance of wanting to sure they predicted it. What I want to know, is who is forming up the battle troops (metaphorically at this point) to launch the attack on the regiments now being organized by Trump, his minions, and the misguided people inappropriately called "Evangelical Christians" (really, it is the DOMINIONIST wing ---check out Wikipedia; you will find out what you need to know) under the leadership of the present "Leader of the House." M Johnson is a one man "sleeper cell" for the wrong kind of revolution. Sorry about the Rant; not revising.
Lord knows we all get way too much Trump ugliness, and as much as we may wish to know as much as we can, have touches of avoidance. It does our suffering souls some good.
The 4th estate is failing us for the most part. NYT and WaPo (the major newspapers I read) have certainly had some doozy positions and downright weird columns.
As usual you are spot on. The Times will keep treating Trump as a normal candidate right up until he instructs his DOJ to arrest all their reporters and destroy the presses.
Not sure I’d lump Savage (whose reporting on national security issues is competent and more than occasionally interesting) with Haberman (who would, in a fair world, be the second-best gossip columnist in Peoria), but there’s clearly a Moonves thumb-on-the-scale at NYT that I can smell here in NE Ohio.
Judith Miller~Maggie Haberman , same~same, yet combined can't top the chit Rukmini Callimachi made up or took from others while claiming it was all her, Will leave it at that.
Still scratchin' my noggin how the NYT missed all-things George Santos. We Missed George Santos should be their catch line rather than the we are The Paper of Record.
When it comes to adherence to journalistic standards, US politics in and out side of the Beltway, Natsec, and Foreign Policy, WaPo has long been the leader and gold standard.
The late great Eric Boehlert used to track and highlight the media’s malfeasance when it comes to Trump in a newsletter called PressRun and on Twitter He did a wonderful job before he died in April, 2022. We need someone with the guts of Eric to expose the media’s coverage of Trump all the time, everyday.
I’ll tell you what alarms me, and I’m not kidding: reporting like this that makes Trump’s win seem inevitable. No matter how you lay out the horrors, indifferent and malleable and non-analytical people can be swayed by reporting like this and think, what the hell, I’m reading and hearing that he’s already won, so I’ll vote for him. He’s being awarded the subtle cachet of the (real or apparent)winner. There’s no way to stop it. No way in hell. The news is a business and Trump sells. But if Trump were to win— god forbid, a thousand times god forbid— the way he was covered this year and next may be studied in journalism schools one day as a case study about how a perfectly decent, highly experienced, liberal president was defeated by a twice impeached, four times indicted scammer and liar simply because major news media unwittingly elevated the latter with constant coverage and carried long, detailed stories that made his presidency, horrors and all, seem inevitable. May it please god, or George Carlin’s invisible man in the sky, or whoever is up there, that I be wrong.
Exactly. WaPo proclaims that "Democracy dies in darkness" and then publishes Robert Kagan's piece that says just what you laid out on your first sentence. If there are future case studies, I hope they detail, point by point, how we were failed by our news media.
Hear, Hear!! Well said Arthur and MJ
Hear. Hear. You definitely said what needed to be said. And it does need to be said over and over again. The constant subliminal media coverage that paints *Rump as inevitable has me so disgusted that I can no longer read any of it. It is so damn obvious that they can’t not know they’re doing it.
That’s what they want people to believe but President Biden will win.
Let’s hope so. I don’t pray, but if I ever did, it would be now.
I am not so sure he will after his inaction in the midst of a humanitarian crisis.
Huh?
You mean the inevitable aftermath of the Hamas Terror State siting their missile platforms and other military infrastructure in civilian areas and launching indiscriminate genocidal attacks on civilians in Israel?
Launched and targeted from schools, apartment buildings, shopping centers, mosques, hospitals, libraries....wait, strike that, Hamas doesn't allow those - civilian-owned properties of all kinds, though.
The law of armed conflict is very clear: the victims (the Israelis, for example, those massacred on October 7, and those kidnapped) can rely on their state to engage in proportional self defense measures until the threat is eliminated, which Hamas could solve immediately by surrender, releasing all captives, and cooperating with the war crimes investigations.
So the main argument turns on what is "proportional," here ya go:
https://dailycaller.com/2023/10/28/opinion-dont-lecture-israel-about-proportionality-shoshana-bryen/
And I must note proleptically, I have next to no respect for The Daily Caller, but that's distinguishable as a platform from speech afforded to S. Bryen to make these lucid arguments - refute them if you can, I am willing to listen to dissent, it's what I do, Gudrun - keep an open mind. I seriously doubt you'll have any cogent, relevant, non-tendentious refutations, but go ahead and give it your best shot!
Excerpt:
"As the Israeli incursion into Gaza continues, increased attention has been focused on the notion of “proportionality” in both the number of casualties on each side and the sophistication of weapons each side brings to bear. Mostly, pundits mean that Israel is killing too many Palestinians. An understanding of proportionality in the laws of war, however, has been missing.
Even friends of Israel get it wrong – one irate speaker on British television said, “Do you want proportionality? Should Israel seek out young women in Gaza, rape, torture, and kill them? Should Israel find babies and murder them in front of their parents – or murder parents in front of their children? Should Israel indiscriminately shell Palestinian villages?”
An Israeli journalist, in a prior response to Hamas missiles, went so far as to call Israel’s Iron Dome missile defense system “unsportsmanlike.” He wondered what FIFA would say “if Germany, with its superior economy and industry, were to replace Manuel Neuer with a bionic goalkeeper… capable of calculating where each Argentine ball will come from, the exact position to stand in, and amount of force needed to block it… On the modern battlefield (Israel) is a bionic Germany.” (RELATED: JD FOSTER: The Three Big Questions Israel Must Ask Before The Ground Invasion)
How unsportsmanlike!
Then there is the “yes, but…” response. “Yes” Hamas started it; “Yes,” Hamas tortured and massacred Israeli civilians; “Yes” Hamas puts military infrastructure in civilian neighborhoods; “Yes” Israel is entitled to self-defense; “Yes” the Israelis warn Palestinians. “But” so many more Palestinians have been killed than Israelis.
Isn’t that the definition of “disproportionate?” No. It isn’t.
Proportionality in international law is not about equality of death or civilian suffering, or even about firepower returned being equal in sophistication or lethality to firepower received. Proportionality weighs the military necessity of an action against the suffering that the action might cause to enemy civilians in the vicinity. A review of expert opinion – none of which was written in relation to Israel – helps to clarify. And each should be read in relation to Hamas crimes against Israeli civilians."
****** The article continues with the relevant citations.
Spot on!
If the evil orange man somehow wins, there won't be journalism schools or case studies, except to proclaim the greatness of Our Great Leader
Sure - if there's no relentless resistance to the fascist agenda Trump will try to implement, how likely do you think that is?
Even a 1% chance terrifies me, and I'll be part of the relentless resistance
Unwittingly? They know perfectly well what they're doing, self fulfilling prophecies pretending to be "oh dear, how dreadful and shocking" exposes.
They highlight polls as if they're accurate predictors though the flaws in methodology are well documented. One easier to read analysis: https://time.com/6278254/polls-trump-biden-2024/
Yes, and they are nothing if not fungible. They’re a snapshot. Quick opinions. Haley is up to 29% in New Hampshire among “likely voters in the primary.” A few weeks ago she was in the single digits.
To your point that this will, one day, be studied in journalism schools...
I agree that the main story will be that the proper function of a free press in a democratic society was undermined by its evolution as a business and by its business models. I don't know about the Times or print media, but I'll share a perspective from working in consumer insights departments for broadcast and cable news.
I can tell you decision making is short term. Ratings reports are issued daily, and a few bad weeks could have the group I worked in scurrying to set up surveys and focus groups.
It is siloed. We had no contact with journalists, just briefings with senior producers. For the most part, our reports went up one side of the org and came down the other.
It is driven by considerations other than news. For example, early in the Trump era, local affiliates in Trump country were going bananas because the liberal perception of the national evening news was affecting their evening schedules. There is also the pablum of morning news which is a huge revenue generator and easily undermined by political polarization.
Not only is the news function often hostage to more revenue generating entertainment functions but these companies are sometimes owned by conglomerates that are in different businesses altogether. Which raises the focus on bottom lines.
Cable news is a different game from broadcast. Instead of living off as broad an audience as possible, ratings are maximized by a deeply devoted audience that consumes as many hours of the 24 as possible. Fox News is a master of this game; we would look in awe at the amount of consumption they got from their audience. But even working on the liberal side, we noted how weak ratings were during the Obama years, "no drama Obama" and how they spiked, and audience involvement rose when Trump came along. Boy, Trump is terrible (but also, kind of good for business). I wonder about this when I see press treatment of Biden.
In my job, it was ok to complain to my manager that, ratings aside, we want to be on the right side of history and a fascist government is actually, in the long term, bad for the news business. Some shadow of this argument could make it into the reports and managers immediately above us would be sympathetic, but my guess is that side of the argument doesn't make it very far up the line.
Fascinating and valuable insights into the internal workings of a media organization. The Brits understand the power of broadcast media and they know the crucial importance of impartiality with those influential voices. What we need is something like the BBC, but would that ever happen in this country, with its worship of the almighty dollar? No way.
I canceled my subscription for the very reason you note above.
What makes your spot on commentary even more frightening is that the near criminal malfeasance of NYT is not the spectre if the less than educated saying "what the hell, he's already won, I might as well vote for him", but the more blase` percentage of the Loyal Opponent who start to think " my vote won't matter", so they stay home in droves, thus giving him a victory of sorts and dooming the Republic.
Good point. Thanks. All of NYT’s constant coverage of this toxic, loathsome humanoid is bad.
Lucian, you expressed everything I felt when I read that article. The authors do deem themselves as “trump whisperers”, like they have a secret code to get the goods before any of us or anyone else does. Whoop-Dee-doo! Give them a prize. NOT!
Stephen Miller is not only an Eichmann look-alike but has adopted his meanness. He and the Heritage Foundation guys with their bullshit Project 2025, can shove those over 900 pages right up their white asses! We cannot ignore them, but we must beat them at every turn. And Lucian, I hope you send tonight’s column to NYT. They need to hear from you, not just from us.
Adopted the meanness??? Miller was already making a name for himself for meanness in high school! A born sadist.
I agree! Send it Lucian!! Since when did the NYT come out on the side of P01135890?? Do they want him to win?? If so, why?? The press is the enemy of the people, remember?? I do not understand!
"Hmm, welcome to my office here, settle in and we'll discuss our advertising sales position."
"No, no, don't apologize for being here early, we value that kind of gumption, it fits with our mission as the world's finest newspaper and online news media outlet going!
Ms. Stearns, let me cut to the chase, we here at the New York Times believe ad sales are the very life-blood, the beating heart of our enterprise to print all the news that fits what sells ads...er, excuse me, all the news we confuse for truths... wait, wait, I'll think of it, Ms. Stearns, this isn't my normal job here, you understand, but Mr. Periwinkle ran off to Tahiti last Friday, left a note saying he was going to join the French Foreign Legion and was very sorry, but he couldn't make it into work today...."
"What? No, he might be back but I doubt it, so you're getting in at a good time, hiring-wise.
I mean, what can you do with a guy like that, pressure too much for him, that's the fourth one this quarter, so you have a great shot at replacing Periwinkle if you play your cards right, sales-wise, know what I mean?"
"Why did he quit so suddenly? Oh who knows, some of us just aren't cut out for amoral money-mad careers, no, that didn't come out right, I know, it was his wife's fault, that's the rumor anyway, you've probably heard of her?
No? Persephone Melpomene Romney Periwinkle, the performance artist? Jumps in front of subway trains and speeding cabs while her assistant films the crowd reaction? Real gutsy broa, er, lady, lady down to her fingertips, anyway, she was too much for ole Perrier Water, I mean Periwinkle, I guess.
Wait, Ms. Stearns, don't leave, you're perfect for the job, I read your resume, Janice, may I call you Janice? Just give us a chance, you'll like it here, very casual as long as you sell ads, lots and lots of ads, ah, now she's gone..."
"Miss Boebert, put down that phone and stop yakking to your mom, yes, I know she's in Congress and I'm not, and stop popping that bubble gum, it's very unseemly - just send in the next one....
Mr. Heep? Mr. Uriah Heep, how nice of you to arrive on time, welcome, welcome to the New York Times...Look, the job's yours, I'm booking the next available flight to Tahiti, just tell little Miss Boebert there you're in charge, ok? Fine, fine, you'll fit right in!"
You are so right, Marlene.
Those monsters piss me off. Miller and his ilk hide behind the Constitution as they spread their evil, and then plan to destroy it once they "take power'. You're damn right we have to beat them at every turn. The Heritage Foundation needs to be demolished.
I agree. Send this one to the NYT!
I cancelled my NYT on-line account that is effective 1-9-24.I could no longer abide by their continued beating the Trump drum by normalizing him, by Biden-berating, by unrelenting ageism against our POTUS.I am still so angry at them and other msm that delivered Trump to us on a ratings bonanza platter, propping him up every damn day with a giant helping of”But her e-mails”.I am still wondering if I should have kept my NYT thing to know what they will be saying in 2024.I will be paying attention to other media and to the many wonderful wordsmiths out there now,Lucian thankfully among them.
Same here. I gave up my emeritus .edu subscription credentials to do it, and I meant what I said.
We're out of here.
I have been threatening to do this(cancelling) for some time.This organization has been part and parcel for why we got Trump in 2016 and why we ALMOST got him in 2020 and they are continuing it to this day.This dangerous journalism turns me so off.Buh-bye NYT.
Bravo! (OK, it’s “Brava” when directed to a woman.) Anyway, right on!
You have inspired me to finally cut the cord also! I will miss Wordle and Spelling Bee, but I spend too much time with that anyway!
You can Google Wordle and Spelling Bee and play for free. Spelling Bee allows you to also play Connections,Tiles and Letter Boxed without a paid subscription.
Thanks Barbara...seems like an insignificant thing to worry about, but thanks!!!
Thank you!
I have ten free articles a month. I’ll send them all to you if you wish....I read very selectively. Some journalists are quite good, but the editorial board stinks.
Awwww-Thank-you for your generosity!I used to get 5 free articles per month( not sure of that)but anyway,I’ll get by.Thanks again.
Written with poison darts properly aimed. I'm not sure what happened to the former "Paper of record," or why, but that sound you hear is Ochses and Sulzbergers rolling around in their graves. Family members still run it, but the direction wasn't supposed to be into the ground. The blood thins, however, and it's true what they say about generational diminution.
Re the "news" of "the likelihood that Trump will pull the U.S. out of NATO," I remember Lardass saying that when he was still president, so that bulletin is maybe four or five years old.
Trump's plans have by now, to quote Leon Wieseltier, achieved fortune cookie status, and thinking people no longer pay attention.
As for "ass-coveryish," it is my new favorite original word.
Fortune cookie status. That was the point I was trying to make in my long comment above about what alarms me. The analogy makes the point that we humans internalize and blithely accept as true almost anything if it’s said loudly enough and often enough. Hitler knew this, famously saying that people may not believe the little lies but they’ll believe the big ones.
At this point I would happily suspend the 1st Amendment for Donald Trump only. His mouth is a clear and present danger.
They are very probably spinning in their graves, not just rolling around (as my mother days if I wear white after Labor Day.)
I'll go with spinning.
Forgive the grotesque parenthetical. It was meant to read: “as my mother would have said if I wore white...” The gremlins are either inside my iPad or my brain. My mother left us looooong ago.
Why is the NYT so obtuse?? Is it management? Is it the editors? Is it the reporters? Is it the both-sides obsession of too much journalism? They live in the same world I do, and they have access to much more information. I really don't get it.
Neither does the NYT. At least you try.
While you've completely nailed the "what" of this situation the "why" of if it still has me shaking my head till it hurts. Surely the NYT isn't worried about losing readership among the MAGA crowd, who wouldn't be caught dead reading it or even using it to wrap up their wet garbage. Do they think they're going to be immune when Donny Dictator bans independent media all together?
I agree. Tracy asked me right after she read the column (and edited it, as she does every day) why the Times went into the tank for Trump way back in 2016 and why now. A column for another day.
I will definitely look forward to reading that!
Can't wait to read your take. All I can come up with is "both-sides-ism run amok". OK, there could be some genetic susceptibility in the Sulzberger family tree, because it's weird that billionaire-owned WaPo is doing (marginally) better than the NYT when "family-owned for generations" is supposed to be a plus.
Me too… re reading that column.
Tell Tracy, appreciate your silent work in the background. Sign of a good team!
lt's a mystery to me also!
I’m so sick and tired of the Gray Lady’s incompetence in covering politics. Bleech. I’d cancel my subscription were it not for the games and cooking apps.
Do they have Kakuro? 😅🤣😂
I think you can still subscribe to just games for $19. Not sure about cooking though.
I'm not sure I would call it incompetence. There's a certain glee to the coverage that belies darker motivations, for example, personal notoriety. Haberman, in particular, seems to rush out stories designed mostly to enable her ubiquitous appearances on cable news networks. If she spent as much time on her reporting as she does on the tee-vee, perhaps we would see less of these dubious click-bait column inches, often riddled with inaccuracies and noncommittal equivocation meant to somehow portray gravitas.
In the good ole days, the Gray Lady would not tolerate such nonsense (see Judith "there's WMD in them thar hills" Miller). She has clearly rounded a bend that puts democracy in danger, with no shame whatsoever.
Apparently you, Lucian, and most of your readers, aren't noticing that the Times has changed its catchy slogan from "All the news that's fit to print" to "All the news because we say it is." My "sources" tell *me* that BMW lawyers stopped the Times from using "The ultimate flacking machine." There was one unintentionally gorgeous (yes, yes, venomous tongue in cheek) quote in that Times piece. Two "top" Trump campaign officials, unnamed, of course, issued a statement trying to defuse anger over Project 2025's plans for Mar-a-Dachau and all the rest of those policy positions by saying they are "theoretical." Uh-huh. The extreme policy positions described in a book published by Franz Eher Verlag on July 18, 1925, titled "Mein Kampf," were also "theoretical." Until they weren't.
Lucian,
It is hard to believe how much they have helped Trump since 2015. I used to believe that it was bad reporting, but now it appears that it is intentional.
All the best and stay safe.
Steve Dundas
"All the exclusive breathless gossip direct from the princes at the court!"
The Atlantic's Jan/Feb 2024 issue, around the house for about two weeks, therefore closed end of November, consists entirely of 24 illustrious bylines on the cover topic: "If Trump Wins." No dispatches from the Times' press room at Mar a Lago, though.
I'm a subscriber so I've got it, but so far I haven't had the nerve to read any of it.
I know, I haven't read it either. The magazine follows me up and down the stairs, and where real men do their reading sitting down, but I haven't got the nerve, or the enthusiasm, or masochistic fascination, to read it either.
Agreed. I'm tired of the "predictions" which have an appearance of wanting to sure they predicted it. What I want to know, is who is forming up the battle troops (metaphorically at this point) to launch the attack on the regiments now being organized by Trump, his minions, and the misguided people inappropriately called "Evangelical Christians" (really, it is the DOMINIONIST wing ---check out Wikipedia; you will find out what you need to know) under the leadership of the present "Leader of the House." M Johnson is a one man "sleeper cell" for the wrong kind of revolution. Sorry about the Rant; not revising.
Time to cancel the Times! I did it years ago and
never regretted it!!!
I’m using most of the NYT under the kitty litter box these days.
Lord knows we all get way too much Trump ugliness, and as much as we may wish to know as much as we can, have touches of avoidance. It does our suffering souls some good.
The 4th estate is failing us for the most part. NYT and WaPo (the major newspapers I read) have certainly had some doozy positions and downright weird columns.
As usual you are spot on. The Times will keep treating Trump as a normal candidate right up until he instructs his DOJ to arrest all their reporters and destroy the presses.
Not sure I’d lump Savage (whose reporting on national security issues is competent and more than occasionally interesting) with Haberman (who would, in a fair world, be the second-best gossip columnist in Peoria), but there’s clearly a Moonves thumb-on-the-scale at NYT that I can smell here in NE Ohio.
Judith Miller~Maggie Haberman , same~same, yet combined can't top the chit Rukmini Callimachi made up or took from others while claiming it was all her, Will leave it at that.
Still scratchin' my noggin how the NYT missed all-things George Santos. We Missed George Santos should be their catch line rather than the we are The Paper of Record.
When it comes to adherence to journalistic standards, US politics in and out side of the Beltway, Natsec, and Foreign Policy, WaPo has long been the leader and gold standard.
"We missed George Santos" 😂
The late great Eric Boehlert used to track and highlight the media’s malfeasance when it comes to Trump in a newsletter called PressRun and on Twitter He did a wonderful job before he died in April, 2022. We need someone with the guts of Eric to expose the media’s coverage of Trump all the time, everyday.