5 ms·

Asking for proof about something that happens on the down-low is a dubious defense. How much proof would you expect to see, unless there was a court case with w

Asking for proof about something that happens on the down-low is a dubious defense. How much proof would you expect to see, unless there was a court case with witnesses and discovered documents and texts? > it would not be be difficult to get clear evidence of this directive from NYT leadership Yes, it would be difficult. Do you think the publisher or managing editor is going to admit to it? A reporter in a position to know is a great source. The news business runs on "a source close to... said" and "a high-placed source said..." If what the source said seems to contradict other evidence, that's a different matter.

barney54 4y ago
Can anyone find a NYT article that is pro-tech?
- trs8080 4y ago
  https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/27/technology/the-2021-good-tech-awards.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/27/technology/the-2021-good-... https://www.nytimes.com/by/john-markoff https://www.nytimes.com/by/john-markoff
- fnordpiglet 4y ago
  It’s always read as the Luddite paper of record to me. Not only does it hate all over tech as an industry compulsively, it hates all over technology in general ritually. I can’t imagine how such a directive could change the paper visibly.
- MichaelCollins 4y ago
  A thinly veiled advertisement extolling the virtue of parents who buy apple product for their kids: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/technology/apple-watch-children-kids.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/technology/apple-watch-ch...
  - Cupertino95014 4y ago
    I think it's a thickly veiled ad, if it's an ad at all. It's legitimate news that some parents do it. It's business news that Apple's trying to make it kid-friendly. The article doesn't extoll the virtues of giving a smartwatch to your kids. I guess you wanted them to trash the whole idea? They do say in the first paragraph, "The smart watch cost $279, and he worried that its recipient would immediately break or lose it."
    - MichaelCollins 4y ago
      Ads often mention the price of the product. The article goes on and on about the supposed benefits of giving your kid a smart watch, specifically the Apple brand of smart watch, contrasting it favorably to buying them a phone instead. At the very least, it's not negative coverage of Apple. Even if you think it neutral coverage (I don't), it's a counter-example to the supposed directive that all tech coverage have a negative tone. And they categorized it as tech news, not business news.
      - Cupertino95014 4y ago
        OK, $279 is actually a negative for a lot of parents, but I guess not for you.
        MichaelCollins 4y ago
        The article is promoting this product as a better alternative than buying a smartphone for your kids. $279 is cheaper than most smartphones. And it's not too hard to find overt Apple ads that list much higher prices. Listing the price of a product in an article singing praises of that product does not constitute the article being critical of Apple.
        Cupertino95014 4y ago
        Perhaps we've exhausted this topic. I view it as mildly positive and very weak journalism, not balanced. Your view is more drastic. A balanced article would have found some parents who all said, "Hell, no, I'm not buying that for him. He'll lose it inside of a month." There are probably a lot of such parents. As for "singing praises of that product" -- I think that is totally legitimate. It IS a product that does a lot of stuff and some people might like it for that. Do you expect them to invent some faults with it? I'd also expect a real journalist to get some numbers on their sales, not just find one user who likes it. (On the other hand, Walt Mossberg would have tried it for a week and given it a grade, idk what.)
- another_story 4y ago
  Short answer yes. This question can be easily answered with a search for NYTimes and green energy in tech or when Elon initially helped Ukraine using Starlink or any of the multitude of articles on advances in robotics or how new advances in computing help solve problems in healthcare.
greenthrow 4y ago
Are you really stating that asking for proof of claims is too much?
- Cupertino95014 4y ago
  How about "proof that the Mafia is shaking down small business owners" ? How much proof would you be able to find for that? Do you insist an owner speak on the record? "Photographs or it didn't happen"? So you ask for evidence, and attempt to correlate it.
  - another_story 4y ago
    If you want to prosecute or persecute those mafia members, yes, evidence is necessary.
    - Cupertino95014 4y ago
      There's a difference between "things that can be proven in a court of law" and "things that are generally considered true." For the former, some shop owner has to risk his life testifying, or the cops have to have recordings. A newspaper does not and cannot hold to this standard.
      - another_story 4y ago
        Which is why I included persecute, which is what people do in many cases online. I think it's good practice to not persecute others until you have sufficient evidence. That can mean not making judgement based on things which are generally true in cases where it can damage another's reputation or result in the internet mob descending on them.
  - deleted 4y ago
    [deleted]

barney54 4y ago

Can anyone find a NYT article that is pro-tech?

trs8080 4y ago
https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/27/technology/the-2021-good-tech-awards.html https://www.nytimes.com/2021/12/27/technology/the-2021-good-... https://www.nytimes.com/by/john-markoff https://www.nytimes.com/by/john-markoff
fnordpiglet 4y ago
It’s always read as the Luddite paper of record to me. Not only does it hate all over tech as an industry compulsively, it hates all over technology in general ritually. I can’t imagine how such a directive could change the paper visibly.
MichaelCollins 4y ago
A thinly veiled advertisement extolling the virtue of parents who buy apple product for their kids: https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/technology/apple-watch-children-kids.html https://www.nytimes.com/2022/09/01/technology/apple-watch-ch...
- Cupertino95014 4y ago
  I think it's a thickly veiled ad, if it's an ad at all. It's legitimate news that some parents do it. It's business news that Apple's trying to make it kid-friendly. The article doesn't extoll the virtues of giving a smartwatch to your kids. I guess you wanted them to trash the whole idea? They do say in the first paragraph, "The smart watch cost $279, and he worried that its recipient would immediately break or lose it."
  - MichaelCollins 4y ago
    Ads often mention the price of the product. The article goes on and on about the supposed benefits of giving your kid a smart watch, specifically the Apple brand of smart watch, contrasting it favorably to buying them a phone instead. At the very least, it's not negative coverage of Apple. Even if you think it neutral coverage (I don't), it's a counter-example to the supposed directive that all tech coverage have a negative tone. And they categorized it as tech news, not business news.
    - Cupertino95014 4y ago
      OK, $279 is actually a negative for a lot of parents, but I guess not for you.
      - MichaelCollins 4y ago
        The article is promoting this product as a better alternative than buying a smartphone for your kids. $279 is cheaper than most smartphones. And it's not too hard to find overt Apple ads that list much higher prices. Listing the price of a product in an article singing praises of that product does not constitute the article being critical of Apple.
        Cupertino95014 4y ago
        Perhaps we've exhausted this topic. I view it as mildly positive and very weak journalism, not balanced. Your view is more drastic. A balanced article would have found some parents who all said, "Hell, no, I'm not buying that for him. He'll lose it inside of a month." There are probably a lot of such parents. As for "singing praises of that product" -- I think that is totally legitimate. It IS a product that does a lot of stuff and some people might like it for that. Do you expect them to invent some faults with it? I'd also expect a real journalist to get some numbers on their sales, not just find one user who likes it. (On the other hand, Walt Mossberg would have tried it for a week and given it a grade, idk what.)
another_story 4y ago
Short answer yes. This question can be easily answered with a search for NYTimes and green energy in tech or when Elon initially helped Ukraine using Starlink or any of the multitude of articles on advances in robotics or how new advances in computing help solve problems in healthcare.

greenthrow 4y ago

Are you really stating that asking for proof of claims is too much?

Cupertino95014 4y ago
How about "proof that the Mafia is shaking down small business owners" ? How much proof would you be able to find for that? Do you insist an owner speak on the record? "Photographs or it didn't happen"? So you ask for evidence, and attempt to correlate it.
- another_story 4y ago
  If you want to prosecute or persecute those mafia members, yes, evidence is necessary.
  - Cupertino95014 4y ago
    There's a difference between "things that can be proven in a court of law" and "things that are generally considered true." For the former, some shop owner has to risk his life testifying, or the cops have to have recordings. A newspaper does not and cannot hold to this standard.
    - another_story 4y ago
      Which is why I included persecute, which is what people do in many cases online. I think it's good practice to not persecute others until you have sufficient evidence. That can mean not making judgement based on things which are generally true in cases where it can damage another's reputation or result in the internet mob descending on them.
- deleted 4y ago
  [deleted]