4 ms·

"The NYT didn’t have to be right, they only had to sell newspapers and clicks." This is totally wrong. The New York Times depends on its reputation for accura

• deleted 7y ago
  [deleted]
• adrianmonk 7y ago
  If they are wrong, their reputation won't suffer that much. They can just say, "We based our story on the best information available to us as outsiders." Which, to me at least, is a perfectly legitimate thing for a newspaper to do. Yes, they should check facts and vet sources, but their primary responsibility is to do the best they can and get the information out there for the public.
  • ljw1001 7y ago
    It's pretty clear that Boeing's leadership could have had better info than the NYT, yet they either didn't, or they ignored/hid what they knew.
• donarb 7y ago
  That seems backwards, I would think they would depend on accuracy for its reputation. Their record of accuracy has suffered quite a bit in the past few years.
• philwelch 7y ago
  When it comes to constructing narratives and interpreting the basic evidence, a newspaper is constrained only by the need to tell and sell a story, not by the need to choose a positive course of action in order to identify and solve the fundamental problems entailed. It's not about the basic facts, it's about what you do with them.
• sitkack 7y ago
  That certainly didn't play when Judith Miller [1] given the bull horn at the NYT allowed the Bush Administration to march us directly into a bullshit war. They are indirectly responsible for the deaths of millions. [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Judith_Miller