3 ms·

However you characterize the Capitol riot, it's fair to say it was a huge story. And the NYT flubbed it badly - they misreported the most incendiary detail, spr

by Tycho 6y ago

However you characterize the Capitol riot, it's fair to say it was a huge story. And the NYT flubbed it badly - they misreported the most incendiary detail, spreading the false claim that a police officer had been bludgeoned to death by a fire extinguisher wielded by members of the mob. But NYT seems to have suffered zero loss of status due to this - very peculiar. Also interesting was that the only TV reporter on the ground when the event was happening was from ITV News, a British station.

silicon2401 6y ago
> But NYT seems to have suffered zero loss of status due to this - very peculiar. Not peculiar at all: in the modern age of constant media feeds, what matters most is something to post and get views/clicks. Whatever happens after that is immaterial This is why I began actively avoiding the news. What they show is arbitrary: their real goal is just making you think there's a breaking scoop in the next few minutes/posts, so keep consuming. If it's uninteresting, boring, incomplete, or misreported as in your example, it doesn't matter to them. So why should it matter to us?