Mess of the Times

 

MANY PEOPLE still get their “news” from The New York Times even though that “news” is gravely one-sided, slanted and corrupt, which is to say politically correct and Woke. It used to be a great paper, still is in certain areas — recipes, travel, etc. — but for stuff that really matters in these troubled times, you should get informed elsewhere.

This is especially true for politics and culture.

I’ve been singing this tune about The Times corruption for years, so with today’s revelation that a woman named Bari Weiss has resigned as Editorial Page editor and the manner in which she did it, I’ve been handed extra ammo, which is great fun.

Read her resignation letter.

“New McCarthyism” has taken root at the paper of record.

— Bari Weiss.

Now stop citing what you read in the NYT. It paints you as a nincompoop.

Same goes for The Washington Post.

29 thoughts on “Mess of the Times

  1. Whoa, Bari is one angry camper. I’d like to have some more background, because I suspect hers is not the only side of the story. Not by far.

    At one level, I can agree with her that the editorial pages of the Times, and particularly the Post, slant liberal. The official editorial stances of those papers are definitely liberal, and such stances are the prerogative of the folks who own the paper. The Chicago Tribune used to tilt moderate/conservative Republican, following the lead of Col. Robert McCormick, who owned the paper for a long time. The WSJ is more conservative, and so on. And the columnists in the Times are mostly liberal, except Ross Douthat, David Brooks, who started out conservative but not so much lately, thanks to Trump.

    That said, I don’t believe the Times or the Post, on their news coverage, publish falsehoods, say, like some many fabrications that come of the WH these days. Their investigations, irk the hell out of Trump and his followers, because they uncover things they’d rather not read about.

    The Times’ investigations of the fraudulent Trump Foundation, Trump University and Trump’s own finances, stand on their own merits (and a Pulitzer in the case of the latter), as much as Trump (and you maybe) may not want to read about them. I don’t think that reading the Times or the Post makes you a “nincompoop.”

    Weiss, suggestions of anti-Semitism at the NYT deserve a double “Whoa!” given the fact the paper has been historically accused of being “controlled by Jews” and some such tropes.

    And absent the Times or Post, where do we turn to? You obviously follow Fox News, judging by the picture at the heading of your post. Do you consider Fox fair and balanced? Breitbart? Where do you get your undiluted truth from, Felipe? You’ve mentioned the White House press site: Is that your idea of unbiased news?

    I think Weiss made some valid points, but her jeremiad reminds of the story of Ferdinand the bullfighter, when he got pinned to the wall by the bull: He saw “A point here and a point there, and a lot bull in between.” I’d like to hear the rest of the story.

    al

    And buy yourself a thesaurus: “Nincompoop” is getting tired.

    Like

    1. Señor Lanier: Spoken like a dedicated man of the left. The NYT and WP are not liberal. They are ham-fisted PC leftists. I think many people, especially we gray-haired folks, still tend to visualize editors and writers at the NYT as older fellows with tweed coats with elbow patches, puffing pipes while writing as objectively as possible. But the truth of the matter is that it’s, as far as I can discern, now a pack of youngsters to a great degree with purple hair and nose rings, etc. Though she does not have purple hair or a nose ring, just look at this Bari Weiss woman. She looks like she graduated from the university last week.

      As for still being “controlled by Jews,” the modern left is notoriously anti-Semitic.

      As for Pulitzers and Nobels, those have been demoted deeply in prestige in recent years. I mean, really, the 1619 Project, the literature prize for Bob Dylan, the peace price for Barry Obama. Good Lord.

      I do not follow Fox News to any extent given that it is slipping down the leftist rabbit hole, the news division, at least. The commentary side is still reliably conservative, thank the Goddess. Where do I get the undiluted truth? Breitbart, Daily Wire, etc. The White House newsletter is very reliable and, of course, always speaks well of Trump, as it should. I often watch Tucker Carlson on Fox’s YouTube channel. He is superlative.

      As for my use of nincompoop, I find it an excellent adjective, rather fun-loving but clear as to my meaning. I embrace the “epithet.” It rides well in these difficult times when far-worse name-calling is common. I prefer the more polite approach. It suits my soft touch.

      Like

    2. Señor Lanier, P.S. 2: I find it interesting that leftists continue citing Fox News as the bogeyman of conservative television. It’s a knee-jerk reaction they cannot seem to stop. Fact is that FNC ownership changed a few years back — I forget to whom — and the FNC news division — not the commentary — has tilted further left. A prime example is the hiring of Donna Brazile who famously fed debate questions to Hillary during the 2016 campaign. That was a textbook example of media corruption. And FNC has hired her. Incredible. Any reputable news organization would blacklist her.

      Like

      1. Al:

        P.S. That editorial by Senator Tom Cotton about sending the National Guard to put down the riots which so ruffled the feathers of the NYT’s staff actually represented the viewpoint of something like 60%+ of Americans. This is yet one small example of how out-of-touch they are. Which is not a good thing in a “news” organization.

        Liked by 1 person

    3. Al:
      The NYT and WA Post mostly don’t publish out-and-out falsehoods. (Though take a look at all the retractions the NYT has had to publish in recent years.) But what they do in spades is to publish misleading stories that leave out key facts. They also just ignore news that doesn’t fit their narrative. (Like all the minorities in Brooklyn who assault Hasidic Jews. This particular omission would kill or at least challenge the narrative of Nazi skinhead/white supremacists that the NYT is so fond of.) Doing both of those things with clockwork regularity is what makes them fake news. Mostly it’s not pure lies, but it sure is slippery stuff, and were it done under oath in a court of law, would certainly be considered perjury.

      So no, you can’t rely on those sources for the truth about anything remotely connected to politics or culture. That you doubt this means you haven’t seriously investigated it. I personally used to love and trust the NYT. Now I distrust them, and frankly have an aversion. I wish it were otherwise, but that’s not the world I currently inhabit.

      Saludos,

      Kim G
      Boston, MA
      Where the Boston Globe isn’t exactly narrative-free either.

      Liked by 1 person

  2. It started with giving Obama the Peace Prize to try and strengthen him and didn’t go over as planned, and has gone downhill from there. Some think that the Times may lean left. Are you kidding me? It has tipped right over.

    Every news has some kind of bias, left or right, but the Times has been over the moon with their hate for Trump ever since the election. A few have tried standing up, but they get trampled into the ground. To think otherwise is more than rose-colored glasses.

    Nincompoop, excellent descriptive word, me thinks.

    Like

    1. Kirk: Being a veteran of 30-odd years in the news business, I must disagree. All news does not have some sort of bias, but lots of it does, especially these days. Some news simply does not lend itself to bias. An example would be a story about a car crash, or the results of a baseball game. But I get your drift. You’re thinking of political stuff.

      I liked that Ms. Weiss included in her resignation letter a jab at the NYT for being obsessed with Trump Hate.

      Yes, nincompoop is a wonderful word. As is the version, nincompoopery.

      Like

      1. Felipe:
        Sadly, even “car crashes” are now politicized. For example, the guy who ran over some BLM protesters on a supposedly closed freeway was black. The major news organizations left out this detail and simply described him as the “driver of a luxury car.” This, of course, was meant to imply that he was some fat-cat white dude who was likely some kind of horrid racist.

        Like

        1. Kim: Well, there are car crashes and there are car crashes. The one you cite is atypical of car crashes. Even I was not aware that driver was black, which goes to show you how most all of the media operates these days. What is left out can be just as important as what is said. It’s pathetic.

          And yet people read these rags and think they’re being informed. They are. Mal-informed.

          Liked by 1 person

          1. You can read the WaPo and NYT cover to cover, watch CNN, MSNBC, or any of the other name-brand TV news outlets, Fox possibly excepted, and still be a low-information voter. It’s really quite sad.

            Like

          2. If the media doesn’t mention race, it usually means whoever isn’t white. Which is mostly fine, until race becomes a key element of the story (like if a black cop shoots a black perp), and then leaving out the race becomes journalistic malpractice.

            Like

  3. A little off topic, but I ran across a political show (Rising With Krystal and Saagar at thehill.com) that has a familiar liberal vs. conservative format but a different feel. (I know, video…probably won’t follow it because.) The hosts don’t argue and actually agree a lot. Both tend toward populism, neither has any use for libertarianism or identity politics. But it seems to be less about scoring points for one side or the other and more about getting insights. I was kind of impressed.

    (Saagar tweets “Getting some popcorn for the Bari Weiss wars.” I might have to tune in to see what they say. I’ve never read a word of hers, and wouldn’t know her from Adam.)

    Like

    1. Creigh: Calm interaction is always best, and rare these days.

      I don’t know who this Saagar you mention is, and the internet doesn’t help on that. I do not have a Twitter account. And when you say you’ve never read a word of hers, if you are referring to Bari Weiss, not Saagar, she was an editor, not a writer on the NYT, so you would not have read anything of hers.

      Funny your aversion to video because that’s where much of today’s information is available. I have, however, the same aversion to podcasts. Never listen to them.

      Like

      1. Saagar is Saagar Enjeti. Here’s a clip that should be right down your alley: “How the Right Can ACTUALLY Defeat Woke Politics.” (Yes, they have an unfortunate habit of all caps in their titles.)

        Like

        1. Kim: I had his number after just a few minutes of the link Craigh sent a couple of days ago. In any event, The Hill is a leftist website, so untrustworthy.

          Like

  4. Not to take the conversation off of “The Old Gray Lady,” but it seems as if journalism is going to take another turn. Did you see that Chatham Hedge Fund will be the buyer of the bankrupt McClatchy newspapers?

    Chatham Asset Management, the winner of a bankruptcy court auction for the McClatchy Co., will take over a continent-spanning chain of 30 prominent daily newspapers, including the Miami Herald, the Sacramento Bee and the Charlotte Observer.

    Chatham already owns “The National Enquirer.”

    Like

    1. Señor Gill: Nope, had not seen that. But newspapers are going down the tubes, the print versions. Everything is going online, slowly but surely. I doubt that Chatham’s ownership of the Enquirer indicates the future of its new newspapers, but who knows?

      Like

  5. I sure hope that young lady got a job offer. It gives me hope for the future of journalism to know someone like her is out there.
    She’s wise beyond her years and has a good grasp on reality.

    Like

    1. Nomad: I’m guessing she had other work lined up before resigning in such a dramatic fashion. As for her giving you hope for the future of journalism, you’re more optimistic than I am. Let’s hope you are correct, and I am not.

      Like

  6. I read the ladies’ resignation letter. Yup. She was angry. However, I do like the Washington Post. In fact, I am a paid subscriber. I agree with most of their opinions, too.

    Like

    1. Laurie: Yes, I know you agree with the WP. I forgive you as I forgave you for being a Bernie supporter. I cannot help pointing out, however, that Christianity and socialism normally make very bad bedfellows.

      Like

      1. I forgive, or at least over look, your right wing views. We can tolerate each other’s viewpoint I suppose. As far as Christianity and socialism, the early church in the book of Acts practiced a form of socialism. The Bible tells us that the first Christians sold belongings and gave to the community’s common good as needed. Also, the monastic tradition as practiced by early Catholics were and, some still are, quite socialistic in nature.

        Like

        1. Laurie: I clearly recall watching a news clip during the either 2016 or 2012 Democrat Convention. They were voting on, item by item, the official platform. The speaker arrived at one in which the word God was going to be entered. On mentioning God, a very noticeable groan passed across the convention floor. Made an impression on me. Did not surprise me, however. There is a reason that Christians, especially nowadays, tend toward the GOP to a great extent.

          And there’s the issue of Bernie Sanders picking the Soviet Union for his honeymoon trip. I don’t think socialism these days has much in common with the Biblical versions.

          Like

Comments are closed.