8 ms·

An Arrest in Canada Casts a Shadow on a New York Times Star, and the Times

86 points by jbegley 6y ago

refurb 6y ago
Interesting read, but about half-way through I realized I was reading a scathing criticism of the New York Times...in the New York Times? "The paper is in the midst of an evolution from the stodgy paper of record into a juicy collection of great narratives, on the web and streaming services." A little odd as the author is writing about the Times in the 3rd person. Threw me off a bit.
- greenyoda 6y ago
  Here's an article on the same story from the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/09/new-york-times-has-its-hands-full-with-review-caliphate/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/09/new-york-... This story gets to the main point a lot faster, and is somewhat more critical of the Times.
- voidhorse 6y ago
  I think this is something people no longer seem to understand about journalism that’s generally speaking symptomatic of the growing polarization and tribalism in modern thought (if you could call it that). People seem to think that every news outlet is red or blue, and furthermore that the journalists have absolutely no autonomy. This is not true. Part of the reason the Times is a reputable source is because they publish things that tow the red/blue line along with self criticism and corrections like this....unfortunately people can’t stomach nuance and alternative view points, just consider the outrage the Times faced a few moths ago for publishing the (admittedly stupid) opinion of a republican politician who was advocating for federal response to the Gerorge Floyd protests. Inability to have rational argument and not get immediately heated in the face of an opposite opinion is a major flaw of proponents of both the right and left....the one thing that vindicates the left in America is that its at least the arguably more humanitarian and ethical side. The internet helps us all live in our own personal realities and not have to ever deign to have a civil conversation with someone who disagrees with us.
  - 23B1 6y ago
    > Inability to have rational argument and not get immediately heated in the face of an opposite opinion is a major flaw of proponents of both the right and left....the one thing that vindicates the left in America is that its at least the arguably more humanitarian and ethical side. The irony of this statement is astounding
    - piva00 6y ago
      > The irony of this statement is astounding Care to spell it out?
  - wolco2 6y ago
    "the one thing that vindicates the left in America is that its at least the arguably more humanitarian and ethical side" Not sure the left is vindicated for "ethical" stances or actions. Pro abortion, assisted end of life, corrupt unions, free speak, gay marriage, larger government waste are things traditionally seen as things associated with the left and unethical by some. Traditionally the right was the party of values and the left was the party of freedom.
    - bawolff 6y ago
      If everyone agrees with you its not really an ethical stance. (Although you have to go pretty far afield from mainstream western civilization to find people who actively disagree with freedom of speech in principle) > Traditionally the right was the party of values and the left was the party of freedom. I dont know about that, but the definition of right and left (and freedom) change over time and geographic location. Nonetheless both sides are routed in values, just different ones ("freedom" is a value)
    - esperent 6y ago
      > Traditionally the right was the party of values and the left was the party of freedom. I presume you're talking about the US so I'll offer a European perspective: whatever about traditional standpoints, in recent times the "left" (democrats) are the party of values, lying somewhere right of center, while the "right" (republicans) are starting to toy with fascism but are currently merely quite far to the right in the region of oligarchy. You guys are in sore need of an actual left leaning political party to balance things out.
- labster 6y ago
  Real newspapers can criticize and investigate themselves. The Los Angeles Times recently ran a series on racism in its newsroom, both historically and today. And that was after an article detailing staff writer who plagiarized his past stories as if they were current. A news organization which issues retractions and mea culpas is trustworthy, one that cannot reflect on itself may be propaganda or worse.
  - refurb 6y ago
    I definitely agree and see this article as a pretty positive thing. Just surprising coming from the NYTs.
    - nl 6y ago
      the NYT has always been pretty self-reflective and public in its self criticism. The most famous recentish (2004) example was their problematic reporting and editorial stance around the second Iraq war: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-the-times-and-iraq.html https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-th...
zaroth 6y ago
> Ms. Callimachi’s approach to storytelling aligned with a more profound shift underway at The Times. Scathingly introspective.
- cwwc 6y ago
  "My reporting suggests that she was delivering what the senior-most leaders of the news organization asked for, with their support." Scathing indeed.
cwwc 6y ago
> "My reporting suggests that she was delivering what the senior-most leaders of the news organization asked for, with their support." Scathing indeed.
- blinding-streak 6y ago
  Reminds me of the journalist Scott Templeton in The Wire season 5. (Just watched that show again and it's top of mind). Incredibly ambitious reporter who sensationalizes stories, bends and breaks the rules, and is supported by upper management at every turn. All while his editor knows he's full of shit.
- golf6 6y ago
  Any profession becomes less ethical the more J ews are involved.
rrdharan 6y ago
I learned about this from the excellent Canadaland podcast: https://www.canadalandshow.com/podcast/279-did-the-new-york-times-get-catfished/ https://www.canadalandshow.com/podcast/279-did-the-new-york-... Side note, Jesse Brown (Canadaland’s creator) was also a cofounder of Bitmoji, which I think gives him an interesting perspective on a few topics: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Brown_(journalist)#Business_career https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Brown_(journalist)#Bus...
- dbuder 6y ago
  I listened to this podcast, it didn't really add that much and one of the hosts seems to think the middle east was a peaceful place until the Americans showed up, as in she says there was no ISIS before America destabilized the region.
23B1 6y ago
Where's the ombudsmen in all this? Oh wait, the Nytimes got rid of their public editor in 2017 after the Jayson Blair incident. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/business/media/new-york-times-buyouts.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/business/media/new-york-t... But don't worry 'newspaper of record' readers: "Mr. Sulzberger, in a newsroom memo, said the public editor’s role had become outdated. '“Our followers on social media and our readers across the internet have come together to collectively serve as a modern watchdog, more vigilant and forceful than one person could ever be,” he wrote. “Our responsibility is to empower all of those watchdogs, and to listen to them, rather than to channel their voice through a single office.”'
- blinding-streak 6y ago
  "(Mr. Baquet and Mr. Kahn, I should note here, are my boss’s boss’s boss and my boss’s boss, respectively, and my writing about The Times while on its payroll brings with it all sorts of potential conflicts of interest and is generally a bit of a nightmare.)" A telling quote from the article. Imagine being given this assignment. A writer would need to research this and report on it with utmost care and delicacy. Being firm enough in your findings to report the truth, but doing so in a way that doesn't burn the place to the ground. Interesting balancing act.
  - aaronbrethorst 6y ago
    He’s the media reporter, and the NYT doesn’t have an ombudsman. This is his job.
    - justinclift 6y ago
      That being said, if there was a story that would 100% burn the place to the ground and there wasn't a way to avoid that burning... would such a story be published by them?
- aaronbrethorst 6y ago
  Margaret Sullivan should be made the new editor in chief of the NYT after Baquet retires in 2021. I’m utterly appalled by what he’s presided over during the last six years.
codelord 6y ago
From the article: > "Ms. Callimachi’s approach to storytelling aligned with a more profound shift underway at The Times .... to turn distant conflicts in Africa and the Middle East into irresistibly accessible stories." > "The Times should have been alert to the possibility that, in its signature audio documentary, it was listening too hard for the story it wanted to hear — rooting for the story" This is interesting coming from Times themselves because that's exactly what I've been feeling in the past couple of years occasionally reading Times' articles. There's too much focus on narrative and less on facts. In reality there's no narrative. There's no black and white. Most things are shades of gray. You'd expect journalists to give you facts, instead their focus is on creating emotion through narrative, while rooting for their story, downplaying inconvenient facts. It's quite sad.
- em500 6y ago
  > You'd expect journalists to give you facts, instead their focus is on creating emotion through narrative, while rooting for their story, downplaying inconvenient facts. Factual news looks like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events. People don't want to read that, and journalists must to some degree write what people want to read. It's quite the dilemma.
  - senkora 6y ago
    I used to read that in high school for debate class, since we were quizzed weekly on current events. I completely agree, it is not exactly thrilling.
  - thu2111 6y ago
    Well, not really. That page is a collection of current events but they're essentially random, with no filtering or ranking for relevance to the reader. So there's some incident in Azerbaijan related to some conflict with a neighbour, something about a change in the speaker of the house in the Philippines, etc. It's possible for news to both be factual and relevant.
  - tupputuppu 6y ago
KKKKkkkk1 6y ago
Every time the NYT fucks up, it becomes a news event worthy of international coverage (e.g., [0]). Which shows you the stellar reputation that the NYT has maintained for more than a century. Kudos to the Sulzbergers for that. [0] https://meduza.io/feature/2020/09/30/the-new-york-times-sdelala-palacha-igil-postoyannym-geroem-populyarnogo-podkasta-a-potom-ego-arestovali-v-kanade-za-mistifikatsiyu https://meduza.io/feature/2020/09/30/the-new-york-times-sdel...
- 3131s 6y ago
  Nice spin, but in what sense does the NYT have a good reputation?
  - rayiner 6y ago
    It at least had a good reputation. In 2009, Tucker Carlson gave a speech at CPAC where he observed that while the NYT has a generally liberal take on the facts, they care tremendously about the accuracy of those facts. This was a decade ago. I wouldn’t say the same thing today.
    - 3131s 6y ago
      No, no. Tucker Carlson is a repulsive piece of shit and a literal traitor who should be executed. I don't care what he thinks and in fact all you've given is further evidence that the NYT is a shit-tier rag.
branweb 6y ago
Interesting. Second instance of journalistic self-criticism in the times this week. First instance (as an oped) here: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/opinion/nyt-1619-project-criticisms.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/opinion/nyt-1619-project-...
fermienrico 6y ago
Why is journalism inundated with drama more so than any other profession I know of?
- meddlepal 6y ago
  Desperation to remain relevant.
- muffinman26 6y ago
  What leads you to this conclusion? I find stories about fraudulent journalists fascinating, but despite my interest in the topic I only see big stories about journalistic misconduct once a year or so, whereas scandals involving politicians, television/movie execs, and tech seem to surface at least every couple of months. Police misconduct has sparked months of protests.
netsharc 6y ago
Reminds me of Spiegel's Claas Relotius scandal, where he invented story details to make for exciting reading which sadly has nothing to do with factual reporting: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/19/top-der-spiegel-journalist-resigns-over-fake-interviews https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/19/top-der-spiege... A resident debunked his article: https://medium.com/@micheleanderson/der-spiegel-journalist-messed-with-the-wrong-small-town-d92f3e0e01a7 https://medium.com/@micheleanderson/der-spiegel-journalist-m... Sadly the "details" he wrote probably also influenced/solidified a lot how German readers viewed small-town Americans as gun-toting simpletons, and IMO that sort of thing is really damaging. And one has to wonder what sort of picture is being drawn by faked ISIS/Syria reporting...
troughway 6y ago
I have been championing for the idea to flag and/or prohibit NYT articles from showing up on HN, because for quite some time now they do very little to advance the topics they discuss, and spend an awful amount of time baiting the individual into emotional outbursts through guile use of selective reporting on things. Whatever NYT used to be hasn't really been relevant. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Nowadays, especially the articles from there posted on HN are very much in the territory of tabloid journalism. Having said that, I'm glad to see I'm not alone in this thinking, although my introductory sentence to this might be seen as too harsh by some. I see no value in having their articles on HN what-so-ever.
magwa101 6y ago
"The Daily" with narrative over fact has turned the NYTimes into a gossip magazine. Access journalism scars the truth.

86 points by jbegley 6y ago

Interesting read, but about half-way through I realized I was reading a scathing criticism of the New York Times...in the New York Times? "The paper is in the midst of an evolution from the stodgy paper of record into a juicy collection of great narratives, on the web and streaming services." A little odd as the author is writing about the Times in the 3rd person. Threw me off a bit.

greenyoda 6y ago
Here's an article on the same story from the Washington Post: https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/09/new-york-times-has-its-hands-full-with-review-caliphate/ https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/2020/10/09/new-york-... This story gets to the main point a lot faster, and is somewhat more critical of the Times.
voidhorse 6y ago
I think this is something people no longer seem to understand about journalism that’s generally speaking symptomatic of the growing polarization and tribalism in modern thought (if you could call it that). People seem to think that every news outlet is red or blue, and furthermore that the journalists have absolutely no autonomy. This is not true. Part of the reason the Times is a reputable source is because they publish things that tow the red/blue line along with self criticism and corrections like this....unfortunately people can’t stomach nuance and alternative view points, just consider the outrage the Times faced a few moths ago for publishing the (admittedly stupid) opinion of a republican politician who was advocating for federal response to the Gerorge Floyd protests. Inability to have rational argument and not get immediately heated in the face of an opposite opinion is a major flaw of proponents of both the right and left....the one thing that vindicates the left in America is that its at least the arguably more humanitarian and ethical side. The internet helps us all live in our own personal realities and not have to ever deign to have a civil conversation with someone who disagrees with us.
- 23B1 6y ago
  > Inability to have rational argument and not get immediately heated in the face of an opposite opinion is a major flaw of proponents of both the right and left....the one thing that vindicates the left in America is that its at least the arguably more humanitarian and ethical side. The irony of this statement is astounding
  - piva00 6y ago
    > The irony of this statement is astounding Care to spell it out?
- wolco2 6y ago
  "the one thing that vindicates the left in America is that its at least the arguably more humanitarian and ethical side" Not sure the left is vindicated for "ethical" stances or actions. Pro abortion, assisted end of life, corrupt unions, free speak, gay marriage, larger government waste are things traditionally seen as things associated with the left and unethical by some. Traditionally the right was the party of values and the left was the party of freedom.
  - bawolff 6y ago
    If everyone agrees with you its not really an ethical stance. (Although you have to go pretty far afield from mainstream western civilization to find people who actively disagree with freedom of speech in principle) > Traditionally the right was the party of values and the left was the party of freedom. I dont know about that, but the definition of right and left (and freedom) change over time and geographic location. Nonetheless both sides are routed in values, just different ones ("freedom" is a value)
  - esperent 6y ago
    > Traditionally the right was the party of values and the left was the party of freedom. I presume you're talking about the US so I'll offer a European perspective: whatever about traditional standpoints, in recent times the "left" (democrats) are the party of values, lying somewhere right of center, while the "right" (republicans) are starting to toy with fascism but are currently merely quite far to the right in the region of oligarchy. You guys are in sore need of an actual left leaning political party to balance things out.
labster 6y ago
Real newspapers can criticize and investigate themselves. The Los Angeles Times recently ran a series on racism in its newsroom, both historically and today. And that was after an article detailing staff writer who plagiarized his past stories as if they were current. A news organization which issues retractions and mea culpas is trustworthy, one that cannot reflect on itself may be propaganda or worse.
- refurb 6y ago
  I definitely agree and see this article as a pretty positive thing. Just surprising coming from the NYTs.
  - nl 6y ago
    the NYT has always been pretty self-reflective and public in its self criticism. The most famous recentish (2004) example was their problematic reporting and editorial stance around the second Iraq war: https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-the-times-and-iraq.html https://www.nytimes.com/2004/05/26/world/from-the-editors-th...

zaroth 6y ago

> Ms. Callimachi’s approach to storytelling aligned with a more profound shift underway at The Times. Scathingly introspective.

cwwc 6y ago
"My reporting suggests that she was delivering what the senior-most leaders of the news organization asked for, with their support." Scathing indeed.

cwwc 6y ago

> "My reporting suggests that she was delivering what the senior-most leaders of the news organization asked for, with their support." Scathing indeed.

blinding-streak 6y ago
Reminds me of the journalist Scott Templeton in The Wire season 5. (Just watched that show again and it's top of mind). Incredibly ambitious reporter who sensationalizes stories, bends and breaks the rules, and is supported by upper management at every turn. All while his editor knows he's full of shit.
golf6 6y ago
Any profession becomes less ethical the more J ews are involved.

rrdharan 6y ago

I learned about this from the excellent Canadaland podcast: https://www.canadalandshow.com/podcast/279-did-the-new-york-times-get-catfished/ https://www.canadalandshow.com/podcast/279-did-the-new-york-... Side note, Jesse Brown (Canadaland’s creator) was also a cofounder of Bitmoji, which I think gives him an interesting perspective on a few topics: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Brown_(journalist)#Business_career https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Jesse_Brown_(journalist)#Bus...

dbuder 6y ago
I listened to this podcast, it didn't really add that much and one of the hosts seems to think the middle east was a peaceful place until the Americans showed up, as in she says there was no ISIS before America destabilized the region.

23B1 6y ago

Where's the ombudsmen in all this? Oh wait, the Nytimes got rid of their public editor in 2017 after the Jayson Blair incident. https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/business/media/new-york-times-buyouts.html https://www.nytimes.com/2017/05/31/business/media/new-york-t... But don't worry 'newspaper of record' readers: "Mr. Sulzberger, in a newsroom memo, said the public editor’s role had become outdated. '“Our followers on social media and our readers across the internet have come together to collectively serve as a modern watchdog, more vigilant and forceful than one person could ever be,” he wrote. “Our responsibility is to empower all of those watchdogs, and to listen to them, rather than to channel their voice through a single office.”'

blinding-streak 6y ago
"(Mr. Baquet and Mr. Kahn, I should note here, are my boss’s boss’s boss and my boss’s boss, respectively, and my writing about The Times while on its payroll brings with it all sorts of potential conflicts of interest and is generally a bit of a nightmare.)" A telling quote from the article. Imagine being given this assignment. A writer would need to research this and report on it with utmost care and delicacy. Being firm enough in your findings to report the truth, but doing so in a way that doesn't burn the place to the ground. Interesting balancing act.
- aaronbrethorst 6y ago
  He’s the media reporter, and the NYT doesn’t have an ombudsman. This is his job.
  - justinclift 6y ago
    That being said, if there was a story that would 100% burn the place to the ground and there wasn't a way to avoid that burning... would such a story be published by them?
aaronbrethorst 6y ago
Margaret Sullivan should be made the new editor in chief of the NYT after Baquet retires in 2021. I’m utterly appalled by what he’s presided over during the last six years.

codelord 6y ago

From the article: > "Ms. Callimachi’s approach to storytelling aligned with a more profound shift underway at The Times .... to turn distant conflicts in Africa and the Middle East into irresistibly accessible stories." > "The Times should have been alert to the possibility that, in its signature audio documentary, it was listening too hard for the story it wanted to hear — rooting for the story" This is interesting coming from Times themselves because that's exactly what I've been feeling in the past couple of years occasionally reading Times' articles. There's too much focus on narrative and less on facts. In reality there's no narrative. There's no black and white. Most things are shades of gray. You'd expect journalists to give you facts, instead their focus is on creating emotion through narrative, while rooting for their story, downplaying inconvenient facts. It's quite sad.

em500 6y ago
> You'd expect journalists to give you facts, instead their focus is on creating emotion through narrative, while rooting for their story, downplaying inconvenient facts. Factual news looks like this: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Portal:Current_events. People don't want to read that, and journalists must to some degree write what people want to read. It's quite the dilemma.
- senkora 6y ago
  I used to read that in high school for debate class, since we were quizzed weekly on current events. I completely agree, it is not exactly thrilling.
- thu2111 6y ago
  Well, not really. That page is a collection of current events but they're essentially random, with no filtering or ranking for relevance to the reader. So there's some incident in Azerbaijan related to some conflict with a neighbour, something about a change in the speaker of the house in the Philippines, etc. It's possible for news to both be factual and relevant.
- tupputuppu 6y ago

KKKKkkkk1 6y ago

Every time the NYT fucks up, it becomes a news event worthy of international coverage (e.g., [0]). Which shows you the stellar reputation that the NYT has maintained for more than a century. Kudos to the Sulzbergers for that. [0] https://meduza.io/feature/2020/09/30/the-new-york-times-sdelala-palacha-igil-postoyannym-geroem-populyarnogo-podkasta-a-potom-ego-arestovali-v-kanade-za-mistifikatsiyu https://meduza.io/feature/2020/09/30/the-new-york-times-sdel...

3131s 6y ago
Nice spin, but in what sense does the NYT have a good reputation?
- rayiner 6y ago
  It at least had a good reputation. In 2009, Tucker Carlson gave a speech at CPAC where he observed that while the NYT has a generally liberal take on the facts, they care tremendously about the accuracy of those facts. This was a decade ago. I wouldn’t say the same thing today.
  - 3131s 6y ago
    No, no. Tucker Carlson is a repulsive piece of shit and a literal traitor who should be executed. I don't care what he thinks and in fact all you've given is further evidence that the NYT is a shit-tier rag.

branweb 6y ago

Interesting. Second instance of journalistic self-criticism in the times this week. First instance (as an oped) here: https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/opinion/nyt-1619-project-criticisms.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/10/09/opinion/nyt-1619-project-...

fermienrico 6y ago

Why is journalism inundated with drama more so than any other profession I know of?

meddlepal 6y ago
Desperation to remain relevant.
muffinman26 6y ago
What leads you to this conclusion? I find stories about fraudulent journalists fascinating, but despite my interest in the topic I only see big stories about journalistic misconduct once a year or so, whereas scandals involving politicians, television/movie execs, and tech seem to surface at least every couple of months. Police misconduct has sparked months of protests.

netsharc 6y ago

Reminds me of Spiegel's Claas Relotius scandal, where he invented story details to make for exciting reading which sadly has nothing to do with factual reporting: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/19/top-der-spiegel-journalist-resigns-over-fake-interviews https://www.theguardian.com/world/2018/dec/19/top-der-spiege... A resident debunked his article: https://medium.com/@micheleanderson/der-spiegel-journalist-messed-with-the-wrong-small-town-d92f3e0e01a7 https://medium.com/@micheleanderson/der-spiegel-journalist-m... Sadly the "details" he wrote probably also influenced/solidified a lot how German readers viewed small-town Americans as gun-toting simpletons, and IMO that sort of thing is really damaging. And one has to wonder what sort of picture is being drawn by faked ISIS/Syria reporting...

troughway 6y ago

I have been championing for the idea to flag and/or prohibit NYT articles from showing up on HN, because for quite some time now they do very little to advance the topics they discuss, and spend an awful amount of time baiting the individual into emotional outbursts through guile use of selective reporting on things. Whatever NYT used to be hasn't really been relevant. Past performance is not indicative of future results. Nowadays, especially the articles from there posted on HN are very much in the territory of tabloid journalism. Having said that, I'm glad to see I'm not alone in this thinking, although my introductory sentence to this might be seen as too harsh by some. I see no value in having their articles on HN what-so-ever.

magwa101 6y ago

"The Daily" with narrative over fact has turned the NYTimes into a gossip magazine. Access journalism scars the truth.