5 ms·

> This kind of language is why the NYT is the subject of so many centrism memes. There are no "two sides" that can "recognize each other's concerns" and get alo

> This kind of language is why the NYT is the subject of so many centrism memes. There are no "two sides" that can "recognize each other's concerns" and get along. There are democracy and authoritarianism. They're a newspaper, not a political blog. This isn't an op-ed. They're not meant to be "taking a side."

whatshisface 7y ago
"It seemed that the mass shooter and the nightclub patrons could no longer recognize each other's concerns."
- mieseratte 7y ago
  This is just so apples-to-oranges it's not even appropriate. China has a legitimate claim to Hong Kong, Hong Kong (arguably) has a right to self-determination. They're a newspaper. Present both sides, let me make a decision. Don't tell me what to think.
  - throwaway2048 7y ago
    Yeah, the difference is the nightclub shooter killed about 50 million less people.
  - esarbe 7y ago
    The PRC is a totalitarian dictatorship that suppresses free speech. The New York Times is a newspaper built on free speech. There really aren't to sides to be report about.
    - Excel_Wizard 7y ago
      NYT could have saved lots of words. "China is bad. Hong Kong should be free." Removing nuance is fun.
yummypaint 7y ago
Thats is the essence of the false equivalency: the idea that if two people disagree with equal passion they must be equally correct. Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green, its to stick their heads out the damn window and see for themselves.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  > Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green What wrong claim have they made? China has a legitimate claim to the territory, Hong Kong has a legitimate right to self-determination (in my opinion). Claiming they're wrong or otherwise conveying false information because they haven't picked a side is just wholly wrong. If you want propaganda that only reports on your side, there are subreddits for that. This is a newspaper.
  - ianleeclark 7y ago
    Do you truly believe that the NYT is post ideology?
michaelt 7y ago
In some situations there is an underlying truth, and opposing sides (who have both public and private agendas) will gladly lie and spin in order to get their way. For example, perhaps Ukraine says they've been invaded by Russian troops without insignias; and Russia says it isn't them. Some would say the ideal in journalism would be not only to report the conflicting statements, but also to determine and report what the underlying truth is.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  What underlying truth have they missed here? The only thing I see here is that people are shitting on the NYT for not picking a side.
empath75 7y ago
They’re not even accurately reporting on what either side wants, though. Even on what they claim to want. It’s like they pulled it out of their ass.
- mieseratte 7y ago
  > They’re not even accurately reporting on what either side wants, though. Even on what they claim to want. It’s like they pulled it out of their ass. Well that's an actual, great complaint! What important details are they leaving out or, perhaps better, what's a more accurate reporting?
C1sc0cat 7y ago
As William Seward said there is a higher law.

whatshisface 7y ago

"It seemed that the mass shooter and the nightclub patrons could no longer recognize each other's concerns."

mieseratte 7y ago
This is just so apples-to-oranges it's not even appropriate. China has a legitimate claim to Hong Kong, Hong Kong (arguably) has a right to self-determination. They're a newspaper. Present both sides, let me make a decision. Don't tell me what to think.
- throwaway2048 7y ago
  Yeah, the difference is the nightclub shooter killed about 50 million less people.
- esarbe 7y ago
  The PRC is a totalitarian dictatorship that suppresses free speech. The New York Times is a newspaper built on free speech. There really aren't to sides to be report about.
  - Excel_Wizard 7y ago
    NYT could have saved lots of words. "China is bad. Hong Kong should be free." Removing nuance is fun.

yummypaint 7y ago

Thats is the essence of the false equivalency: the idea that if two people disagree with equal passion they must be equally correct. Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green, its to stick their heads out the damn window and see for themselves.

mieseratte 7y ago
> Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green What wrong claim have they made? China has a legitimate claim to the territory, Hong Kong has a legitimate right to self-determination (in my opinion). Claiming they're wrong or otherwise conveying false information because they haven't picked a side is just wholly wrong. If you want propaganda that only reports on your side, there are subreddits for that. This is a newspaper.
- ianleeclark 7y ago
  Do you truly believe that the NYT is post ideology?

michaelt 7y ago

In some situations there is an underlying truth, and opposing sides (who have both public and private agendas) will gladly lie and spin in order to get their way. For example, perhaps Ukraine says they've been invaded by Russian troops without insignias; and Russia says it isn't them. Some would say the ideal in journalism would be not only to report the conflicting statements, but also to determine and report what the underlying truth is.

mieseratte 7y ago
What underlying truth have they missed here? The only thing I see here is that people are shitting on the NYT for not picking a side.

empath75 7y ago

They’re not even accurately reporting on what either side wants, though. Even on what they claim to want. It’s like they pulled it out of their ass.

mieseratte 7y ago
> They’re not even accurately reporting on what either side wants, though. Even on what they claim to want. It’s like they pulled it out of their ass. Well that's an actual, great complaint! What important details are they leaving out or, perhaps better, what's a more accurate reporting?

C1sc0cat 7y ago

As William Seward said there is a higher law.