3 ms·
> Here's an article that covers a series of severe factual errors in the New York Times, caused by the political biases of the institution: I don't have the ex
by iudqnolq 7y ago
> Here's an article that covers a series of severe factual errors in the New York Times, caused by the political biases of the institution:
I don't have the expertise necessary to evaluate this myself. Two issues that jumped out at me, however: unherd doesn't mention that some of the articles they criticize are opinion pieces, and if you Google keywords from their first takedown you'll find more nuanced coverage.
From that I'm (possibly unfairly) categorizing the article you linked as likely of minimal value, and didn't read it through.
- busterarm 7y agoWhat do you do when it's the NYT Editorial Board themselves writing the Op-Ed that gets facts wrong? The older I've gotten, the more I've read news stories that are directly related to me, my industry or people I'm in regular contact with. The percentage of these stories that are demonstrably false even on a basic fact checking level is 100%. In most instances, the reporting tells the exact opposite story from the events that happened and every single part of the story is misrepresented. I started to see this a lot with Vice and BuzzFeed but it's crept into WaPo and most notably the NYT. I can't trust the Grey Lady anymore.
- iudqnolq 7y agoFYI, all the articles I clicked on in the link that started all of this were opeds by people not associated with the nytimes.
- busterarm 7y agoI wasn't speaking to that article specifically but at the lax stewardship that the NYT is under right now. NYT Editorial Board members do write Op-Eds of the sort I mention.
- thu2111 7y agoDoes it matter? What separates some random blog on blogspot from an op-ed in the NYT? If it's anything at all it should be that the op-ed is higher quality and more likely to have its facts in order. That clearly isn't the case at all, and that correctly degrades the brand of the entire newspaper. If they're willing to publish claims that are transparently false in their op-eds section why would it be any different in their news section? They already established that factual accuracy is optional.
- iudqnolq 7y ago> If they're willing to publish claims that are transparently false in their op-eds section why would it be any different in their news section? Because op-eds are for controversial positions that are of public interest but aren't supported well enough or neutral enough for a news article. That's the definition. If it's clearly true you won't find it in an op-ed in general in any newspaper. I'm sick of people who can't be bothered to look up terms they don't know using them to spuriously attack institutions that are crucial to our liberty in America.
- thu2111 7y agoOK, let's rephrase. Why have op-eds at all? I understand why 30 years ago. But today anyone can publish online. The op-ed appears to be an obsolete institution that's now seriously degrading trust in news outlets. If bias and inaccuracy was random then "it's just interesting blogs" might be an acceptable way for op-ed sections to go. When the problems trend obviously in one direction it becomes clear that the entire organisation has an agenda. crucial to our liberty in America As you may have guessed, I'm not American, and I'm sick of meeting Americans who have completely bizarre and distorted views of the UK because of the factually inaccurate nonsense they read in this supposedly high quality "newspaper".