3 ms·

Agreed. Circa 2016, I was hoping that institutions like the NY Times would be a bulwark against the coming wave of misinformation and propaganda. Instead, the

Agreed. Circa 2016, I was hoping that institutions like the NY Times would be a bulwark against the coming wave of misinformation and propaganda. Instead, the Times realized that propaganda was profitable, Brooklynites or wannabe-Brooklynites were wealthy enough to fleece, and that "real news" was boring. And here we are: hoping that some random Silicon Valley startup can save the Truth for civilization.

scrozart 6y ago
Can you provide an example of NYT misinformation or propaganda?
- throwaway894345 6y ago
  I have no truck with MAGA folks, but NYT joined the rest of the media in maligning a group of teenagers wearing MAGA hats as initiating a conflict with a Native American “Elder” when the source video shows a more bizarre (and frankly more newsworthy) story: the boys were waiting for their busses during a school trip and they were accosted by some Black Hebrew Israelites (including racist and homophobic slurs) after which the Native American man, Nathan Phillips (who was initially falsely reported to be a veteran, although I don’t recall if the Times also propagated this particular falsehood), tried to match his group through the group of kids in a very odd and confrontational style (by his own admission he didn’t think he ought to have to go around the group because he was tired of being made to yield to whites or some such). Hardly the “Boys with MAGA hats surround Native American Elder” headline that NYT and others ran.
  - austincheney 6y ago
    I agree that event wasn’t news worthy, but those boys were criminally intimidating due to intent. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intimidation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intimidation I suspect if this wasn’t some viral social media nonsense established publishers wouldn’t wasted any effort on this. When you are funded by advertising you go where the eyeballs are.
    - throwaway894345 6y ago
      I encourage you to watch the video and read the various descriptions of what happened. I don’t believe even Mr. Phillips alleges that the boys were attempting to intimidate anyone. I don’t think anyone could consider their actions to be “intimidation”. If you have such a tenuous definition of the term, then surely Mr. Phillips by drumming directly toward the boys (who had just been accosted) is the guilty party. But again, I think that would be absurd to consider it intimidation rather than a bizarre misunderstanding or mere bad behavior.
      - austincheney 6y ago
        It does not matter whether I think they were intimidating or not. What matters is what the law says. http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/SSH-KYR-DC.pdf http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/... I used the incorrect legal term. More precisely the boy committed a lesser offense of disorderly conduct according to what the law says for that area.
        throwaway894345 6y ago
        I don’t think they did anything that would be construed as violating the law.
- SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
  Sure. For example, in the wake of the Jacob Blake shooting, the NYT and other news organizations frequently described him as "unarmed" (e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/us/politics/trump-kenosha.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/us/politics/trump-kenosha...). This description was false - the famous video shows police officers instructing him to "drop the knife", both local law enforcement and the DOJ said that he was holding a knife, and Blake himself has since acknowledged that he was.
- appleflaxen 6y ago
  This is a reasonable assessment, with the most relevant portions quoted directly. https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/05/19/how-the-new-york-times-enhances-trumps-propaganda/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/05/19/how-the-new-york-tim... A current example of such bad journalism is the May 15, 2020 edition of the New York Times. On the front page of the Times (and “above the fold” to boot) is Peter Baker’s article on Trump’s latest campaign against President Barack Obama, now given the politically charged catchphrase of “Obamagate.” The charge is a typical Trumpian diversionary tactic that has no substantive or evidentiary basis in fact. Meanwhile, on the inside pages of the Times, we find the testimony of a courageous whistleblower, Dr. Rick Bright, the former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, who documented the Trump administration’s dereliction of duty in responding to the Covid-19 crisis. Bright’s testimony was definitely front page news. The “Obamagate” charge is disinformation, a total fraud. It should be confined to the echo chambers of Fox News and right-wing social media. But Baker’s article gives the story greater legs, and it is a perfect example of the false equivalence that has dominated the Times’ coverage of Trump since his campaign in 2015. Half the article was devoted to Trump’s grievances with his predecessor, and Senator Lindsay Graham’s immediate willingness to investigate the phony charges. And half was devoted to the fact that the accusations involved “undefined and unspecified crimes.” The following day, an article in the Times concluded that it was Trump’s “unbending…belief” that Obama was “personally involved in a plot against him.” It is impossible to know what Trump actually believes so why would the Times give him the benefit of the doubt?

scrozart 6y ago

Can you provide an example of NYT misinformation or propaganda?

throwaway894345 6y ago
I have no truck with MAGA folks, but NYT joined the rest of the media in maligning a group of teenagers wearing MAGA hats as initiating a conflict with a Native American “Elder” when the source video shows a more bizarre (and frankly more newsworthy) story: the boys were waiting for their busses during a school trip and they were accosted by some Black Hebrew Israelites (including racist and homophobic slurs) after which the Native American man, Nathan Phillips (who was initially falsely reported to be a veteran, although I don’t recall if the Times also propagated this particular falsehood), tried to match his group through the group of kids in a very odd and confrontational style (by his own admission he didn’t think he ought to have to go around the group because he was tired of being made to yield to whites or some such). Hardly the “Boys with MAGA hats surround Native American Elder” headline that NYT and others ran.
- austincheney 6y ago
  I agree that event wasn’t news worthy, but those boys were criminally intimidating due to intent. https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intimidation https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Intimidation I suspect if this wasn’t some viral social media nonsense established publishers wouldn’t wasted any effort on this. When you are funded by advertising you go where the eyeballs are.
  - throwaway894345 6y ago
    I encourage you to watch the video and read the various descriptions of what happened. I don’t believe even Mr. Phillips alleges that the boys were attempting to intimidate anyone. I don’t think anyone could consider their actions to be “intimidation”. If you have such a tenuous definition of the term, then surely Mr. Phillips by drumming directly toward the boys (who had just been accosted) is the guilty party. But again, I think that would be absurd to consider it intimidation rather than a bizarre misunderstanding or mere bad behavior.
    - austincheney 6y ago
      It does not matter whether I think they were intimidating or not. What matters is what the law says. http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/12/SSH-KYR-DC.pdf http://www.stopstreetharassment.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/... I used the incorrect legal term. More precisely the boy committed a lesser offense of disorderly conduct according to what the law says for that area.
      - throwaway894345 6y ago
        I don’t think they did anything that would be construed as violating the law.
SpicyLemonZest 6y ago
Sure. For example, in the wake of the Jacob Blake shooting, the NYT and other news organizations frequently described him as "unarmed" (e.g. https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/us/politics/trump-kenosha.html https://www.nytimes.com/2020/08/31/us/politics/trump-kenosha...). This description was false - the famous video shows police officers instructing him to "drop the knife", both local law enforcement and the DOJ said that he was holding a knife, and Blake himself has since acknowledged that he was.
appleflaxen 6y ago
This is a reasonable assessment, with the most relevant portions quoted directly. https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/05/19/how-the-new-york-times-enhances-trumps-propaganda/ https://www.counterpunch.org/2020/05/19/how-the-new-york-tim... A current example of such bad journalism is the May 15, 2020 edition of the New York Times. On the front page of the Times (and “above the fold” to boot) is Peter Baker’s article on Trump’s latest campaign against President Barack Obama, now given the politically charged catchphrase of “Obamagate.” The charge is a typical Trumpian diversionary tactic that has no substantive or evidentiary basis in fact. Meanwhile, on the inside pages of the Times, we find the testimony of a courageous whistleblower, Dr. Rick Bright, the former director of the Biomedical Advanced Research and Development Authority, who documented the Trump administration’s dereliction of duty in responding to the Covid-19 crisis. Bright’s testimony was definitely front page news. The “Obamagate” charge is disinformation, a total fraud. It should be confined to the echo chambers of Fox News and right-wing social media. But Baker’s article gives the story greater legs, and it is a perfect example of the false equivalence that has dominated the Times’ coverage of Trump since his campaign in 2015. Half the article was devoted to Trump’s grievances with his predecessor, and Senator Lindsay Graham’s immediate willingness to investigate the phony charges. And half was devoted to the fact that the accusations involved “undefined and unspecified crimes.” The following day, an article in the Times concluded that it was Trump’s “unbending…belief” that Obama was “personally involved in a plot against him.” It is impossible to know what Trump actually believes so why would the Times give him the benefit of the doubt?