The fast-falling New York Times has gone mad

  • Thread starter Thread starter JimG
  • Start date Start date
Status
Not open for further replies.
Bari Weiss wasn’t woke enough to work at NYT.

Yeah
 
However, the NYT did recently hire the brilliant millennial Catholic writer Elizabeth Bruenig (stole her from the Washington Post). So, there’s that! Also, Ross Douthat writes for the NYT. So not all is lost…
 
I never liked the NYT. Back in the days when papers were worth reading, I was always a WaPo fan and thought the Times was boring and often leftist. Apparently now it’s total garbage, which in my mind is just a hop, skip and jump from where it was before, partial garbage. And they want me to pay money to read their articles online? That’ll be the day!

And I’m not even that conservative - I just want a “paper of record” that’s reasonably neutral in its coverage. Seems like that’s the impossible dream nowadays.

 
Last edited:
The New York Post calls the Time “fast-falling”? Pot, meet Kettle.
 
As this razor-thin election proves, the country is still deeply divided. It hardly helps that Big Tech is further curating news, manipulating and siloing us into immovable positions and opinions.
Click to expand...
It’s interesting that this quote came up in this article, as I was just complaining to some friends about the news items being highlighted for me to view on twitter. Now I get that twitter is privately ran, so they are allowed to do as they please. But the harder they try to curate news to get me to think in a certain way, the more skeptical and less trusting of it I become.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
The Post isn’t “fast-falling”, it has nowhere to fall to. It’s a tabloid and has happily existed at the bottom of the ladder for a long time.
Click to expand...
I was referring more to circulation, which has been falling pretty rapidly for the Post. I agree it already won the race to the bottom as a tabloid.
 
I hope it sticks around. I love its front cover pages. I’d pay them for an online subscription, same for the Daily Mail which at one point was reporting details of crime stories in my own neighborhood outside Baltimore that the local paper wouldn’t print because someone might get “offended”. Sorry but if someone is stabbing people in my neighborhood i would like to know about that and have a physical description of the stabber.
 
Not at all bias to see NY Post saying NY Times is falling… might as well have Wendy’s call out Burger King for making bad burgers
 
The NY Post may be a tabloid but it’s still one of the few major newspapers that reports news items that the mainstream media ignores. Yeah it’s biased, but it’s the uncommon bias.

Once the Post does cover an issue there’s a chance the msm might cover it. The Times on the other hand has the common bias. If the Times disappeared its spin would be duplicated by many other sources. The items it looks for are also looked for by many others.

Thus the loss of the Post would be a much greater loss for journalism.
 
Last edited:
Tis_Bearself said:
Back in the days when papers were worth reading, …
Click to expand...
A sad but true comment on most city’s daily newspapers. They keep getting thinner and yet more expensive. I always subscribed to the local newspaper and only quit now because my eyesight can’t cope with the small print. At one time many newspapers published both morning and evening editions. But I can’t blame the publishers entirely for declining circulation. It seems nobody reads anymore, and all they want of the news is the headline. Too much print causes people to lose interest and retreat to their smartphones.
 
The New York Post is owned by Rupert Murdoch’s News Corp.

News Corp is the dominant print news network in Australia and the UK. Not so much in the US. (Murdoch also owns Fox News, but via 21st Century Fox, after it was split off from News Corp in the 2010s).

Newscorp regularly attacks other media, typically with allegations of left wing bias. Often with some justification, but also with hyperbole (eg. “gone mad”). So, while this article may have some merit, it is best to see it in the context of the News Corp’s strategic competition with other media.

Curiously, Murdoch’s first newspaper was the evening tabloid in my hometown of Adelaide, The News, which he acquired in 1952 and which went defunct in 1992, when the evening newspaper had become a relic of a bygone era. Murdoch himself has relocated from Australia to the UK, and then from the UK to the US.
 
Last edited:
JimG said:
It seems nobody reads anymore, and all they want of the news is the headline. Too much print causes people to lose interest and retreat to their smartphones.
Click to expand...
Hence the reason that many people cannot follow an argument or engage in an active debate and will resort to ad hominem attacks…
 
It’s perfectly possible to put out a decent newspaper or other publication in electronic form. To me that’s preferable to dealing with physical newspapers that have to be picked up off the porch, recycled, delivery started and stopped when you’re out of town, etc. Many online publications still manage to put out decent stuff to read in electronic format. Unfortunately, many newspapers did not adapt well to an electronic model, or they have their electronic version being run under the newspaper’s branded name by a separate company with very poor standards for journalism and editing.

However, that’s a separate issue from whether the coverage is biased. The New York TImes and WaPo have always had good electronic editions from a quality control standpoint, as in the articles are decently researched, well written, corrections are made when needed etc. But the coverage is often very politically biased, which is not my expectation for a “paper of record”.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top