4 ms·

The NY Times story was the catalyst for Weinstein's firing and eventual arrest.

coldtea 6y ago
It's easy to be the catalyst for the firing and arrest of a rapist. Did the NYT manage to sell this as some "heroic" Watergate-level journalism on their part?
- brown9-2 6y ago
  They won a Pulitzer Prize for the reporting and stories they broke about Weinstein: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/new-york-times-reporting-led-jodi-kantor-and-megan-twohey-and-new-yorker-reporting-ronan https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/new-york-times-reporting-le... * For explosive, impactful journalism that exposed powerful and wealthy sexual predators, including allegations against one of Hollywood’s most influential producers, bringing them to account for long-suppressed allegations of coercion, brutality and victim silencing, thus spurring a worldwide reckoning about sexual abuse of women.* https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018 https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018 The idea that it was “easy” to report these stories is hard to believe when he was able to abuse women for decades without publicity.
  - jimmygrapes 6y ago
    NYT does a great job of publishing one or two "big" things like this a year, in order to maintain their status as award winning journalism. They then use this reputation to incite distrust, fear, and potential violence among the populace, by inserting (or changing) embellishment words and opinion to unethically modify how factual evidence is presented [0]. And yes, I do recognize my hypocrisy in adding the word "unethically" there. Take a look for yourself at the link. [0]: https://mobile.twitter.com/nyt_diff https://mobile.twitter.com/nyt_diff
- ughthisguy 6y ago
  Judging from your other comment here it's clear that you have a major axe to grind against the NYT. Your case would be a lot more compelling if you could do the research (that you ironically accuse them of being so bad at) yourself first: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26124200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26124200

It's easy to be the catalyst for the firing and arrest of a rapist. Did the NYT manage to sell this as some "heroic" Watergate-level journalism on their part?

brown9-2 6y ago
They won a Pulitzer Prize for the reporting and stories they broke about Weinstein: https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/new-york-times-reporting-led-jodi-kantor-and-megan-twohey-and-new-yorker-reporting-ronan https://www.pulitzer.org/winners/new-york-times-reporting-le... * For explosive, impactful journalism that exposed powerful and wealthy sexual predators, including allegations against one of Hollywood’s most influential producers, bringing them to account for long-suppressed allegations of coercion, brutality and victim silencing, thus spurring a worldwide reckoning about sexual abuse of women.* https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018 https://www.pulitzer.org/prize-winners-by-year/2018 The idea that it was “easy” to report these stories is hard to believe when he was able to abuse women for decades without publicity.
- jimmygrapes 6y ago
  NYT does a great job of publishing one or two "big" things like this a year, in order to maintain their status as award winning journalism. They then use this reputation to incite distrust, fear, and potential violence among the populace, by inserting (or changing) embellishment words and opinion to unethically modify how factual evidence is presented [0]. And yes, I do recognize my hypocrisy in adding the word "unethically" there. Take a look for yourself at the link. [0]: https://mobile.twitter.com/nyt_diff https://mobile.twitter.com/nyt_diff
ughthisguy 6y ago
Judging from your other comment here it's clear that you have a major axe to grind against the NYT. Your case would be a lot more compelling if you could do the research (that you ironically accuse them of being so bad at) yourself first: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26124200 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=26124200