New York Times

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
40,425
Reaction score
2,182
Points
113
The New York Times explains that their whole newsroom mission was Trump Russia for two years - they got the story totally wrong and now they claim they did a great job. Next mission? Trump racism.

Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism.

"We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well," Baquet said. "Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story."

Now, Baquet continued, "I think that we've got to change." The Times must "write more deeply about the country, race, and other divisions."

"I mean, the vision for coverage for the next two years is what I talked about earlier: How do we cover a guy who makes these kinds of remarks?" Baquet said. "How do we cover the world's reaction to him? How do we do that while continuing to cover his policies? How do we cover America, that's become so divided by Donald Trump?"


 

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
330
Points
83
Correct me if you disagree but it seems to me the polarizing nature of the media we consume has become a huge impediment to how we treat each other as human beings. Far greater damage is created by media outlets with an agenda than the impact of any one man. We migrate to the viewpoints that we share and consume the opinions of those particular media outlets. Those media outlets have become far less "fair and balanced" and more extreme, thereby creating less rational/moderate viewpoints in the consumers. Now you are a either a racist Republican or a baby-killing Democrat. No middle ground. Kind of sad really.
 

Gophers_4life

Active member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
6,215
Reaction score
1
Points
36
Correct me if you disagree but it seems to me the polarizing nature of the media we consume has become a huge impediment to how we treat each other as human beings. Far greater damage is created by media outlets with an agenda than the impact of any one man. We migrate to the viewpoints that we share and consume the opinions of those particular media outlets. Those media outlets have become far less "fair and balanced" and more extreme, thereby creating less rational/moderate viewpoints in the consumers. Now you are a either a racist Republican or a baby-killing Democrat. No middle ground. Kind of sad really.
Media only tries to sell us what they think we want, thus giving themselves the highest ratings, views, clicks possible.

So I will counter-propose that our worldview ideals have in fact diverged and veered farther to each extreme than before. It gives us please to subscribe to these extremes and it gives us pleasure to hate the other side. Because we are s__tty humans, and our minds need some amount of hatred, like plants need some amount of water.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,113
Reaction score
1,261
Points
113
Correct me if you disagree but it seems to me the polarizing nature of the media we consume has become a huge impediment to how we treat each other as human beings. Far greater damage is created by media outlets with an agenda than the impact of any one man. We migrate to the viewpoints that we share and consume the opinions of those particular media outlets. Those media outlets have become far less "fair and balanced" and more extreme, thereby creating less rational/moderate viewpoints in the consumers. Now you are a either a racist Republican or a baby-killing Democrat. No middle ground. Kind of sad really.
Agree. Cable TV, internet, and the demand for viewers, readers and ratings has divided the country more than anything.
 

Gopherguy0723

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 9, 2013
Messages
4,116
Reaction score
73
Points
48
Should certain types of media only be non-profit companies? Should we reinstate the Fairness Doctrine?
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
40,425
Reaction score
2,182
Points
113
Correct me if you disagree but it seems to me the polarizing nature of the media we consume has become a huge impediment to how we treat each other as human beings. Far greater damage is created by media outlets with an agenda than the impact of any one man. We migrate to the viewpoints that we share and consume the opinions of those particular media outlets. Those media outlets have become far less "fair and balanced" and more extreme, thereby creating less rational/moderate viewpoints in the consumers. Now you are a either a racist Republican or a baby-killing Democrat. No middle ground. Kind of sad really.
Good post. One point I would add- Left leaning people have come to drink the kool aide that their sources are unbiased and unvarnished truth...the NYT, WaPo, CBS,CNN, etc. This is a lie and the most dangerous one of all because it leads them to go all in because they hold the "truth" even when they are adhering to propaganda. We on the right can do better in our treatment of the left, but I will tell you, it is far more dangerous to be on the right than on the left. If you put a Bernie Sanders sticker on your car, well you just made your car uglier. If you put a Trump sticker on your car you made your car uglier and someone is going to add to it by keying your car. Do NOT wear a MAGA hat in public. The anger on the left is incredible and it is aggressive. I think that the right is angry, but the treatment of the left is not nearly to the same level. All that said, your post is valid.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,113
Reaction score
1,261
Points
113
Should certain types of media only be non-profit companies? Should we reinstate the Fairness Doctrine?
Can you put toothpaste back in the tube? If we went to non-profit news, we already know how slanted that would be to the left.
 
Last edited:

golfing18now

Well-known member
Joined
May 17, 2013
Messages
1,842
Reaction score
330
Points
83
Media only tries to sell us what they think we want, thus giving themselves the highest ratings, views, clicks possible.

So I will counter-propose that our worldview ideals have in fact diverged and veered farther to each extreme than before. It gives us please to subscribe to these extremes and it gives us pleasure to hate the other side. Because we are s__tty humans, and our minds need some amount of hatred, like plants need some amount of water.
Hard to know. Chicken and egg thing for me, perhaps. As a Republican leaning voter, I can't possibly defend some of the things that Trump has said. He is not anybody that I would want my kids to emulate. But the absolute onslaught of negative media coverage has raised some of the things he has done to a much higher level. Worse yet is the corralling of all people that voted similarly into the same boat like we are a bunch of sheep with no ability for independent thought. Look no further than the OTB on this site. Are we really that different or are we almost "trained" into that approach? I don't know.
 

Gophers_4life

Active member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
6,215
Reaction score
1
Points
36
But the absolute onslaught of negative media coverage has raised some of the things he has done to a much higher level.
Not saying it hasn’t, only saying that if there weren’t millions of people out there hungry to gobble it up, it wouldn’t get produced.

Are we really that different or are we almost "trained" into that approach?
I go with the former, every day and twice on Sunday.

If I weren’t certain that it would be disastrous for the world, due to the loss of a check on Russia’s and China’s power .... I would absolutely advocate for splitting the US up into some number of independent countries in 2 to 50.
 

Norseland Store

Active member
Joined
Nov 28, 2008
Messages
231
Reaction score
33
Points
28
I’d be all for splitting the country up. Unfortunately liberals are like locusts. They destroy everything they touch. In no time they would make everywhere into California, Illinois, New York and New Jersey.
 

Gophers_4life

Active member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
6,215
Reaction score
1
Points
36
I’d be all for splitting the country up. Unfortunately liberals are like locusts. They destroy everything they touch. In no time they would make everywhere into California, Illinois, New York and New Jersey.
Isn’t that the point of splitting it up?? Countries that would be strong majority conservative?

NJ has a republican governor. A fat f__k, if I might say so.
 

GoodasGold

Well-known member
Joined
Feb 11, 2011
Messages
9,426
Reaction score
493
Points
83
Broadcast media: Fox News
Print Media: The Onion

Both equally true and balanced.
 

Angry

Well-known member
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
1,380
Reaction score
70
Points
48
Isn’t that the point of splitting it up?? Countries that would be strong majority conservative?

NJ has a republican governor. A fat f__k, if I might say so.
Phil Murphy isn’t fat, nor a republican.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
21,993
Reaction score
1,018
Points
113
A perfect example of how bad the MSM is now, and how far from journalism the NYT specifically has found itself, was last week when Trump denounced racism, violence & called for unity after the El Paso shooting. The NYT headline read: "Trump urges Unity vs Racism". The NYT readers were so outraged that the NYT didn't intentionally skew the headline to bash Trump, that the NYT had to retract that headline. Let that sink in...The NYT now lets it's readers dictate what news to print. That's not journalism. That's propaganda.
 

Gophers_4life

Active member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
6,215
Reaction score
1
Points
36
A perfect example of how bad the MSM is now, and how far from journalism the NYT specifically has found itself, was last week when Trump denounced racism, violence & called for unity after the El Paso shooting. The NYT headline read: "Trump urges Unity vs Racism". The NYT readers were so outraged that the NYT didn't intentionally skew the headline to bash Trump, that the NYT had to retract that headline. Let that sink in...The NYT now lets it's readers dictate what news to print. That's not journalism. That's propaganda.
Even thought I’m sure what you’re saying is 75-90% BS, it does prove me right.
 

Costa Rican Gopher

Mind of a Scientist
Joined
Nov 22, 2008
Messages
21,993
Reaction score
1,018
Points
113
Correct me if you disagree but it seems to me the polarizing nature of the media we consume has become a huge impediment to how we treat each other as human beings. Far greater damage is created by media outlets with an agenda than the impact of any one man. We migrate to the viewpoints that we share and consume the opinions of those particular media outlets. Those media outlets have become far less "fair and balanced" and more extreme, thereby creating less rational/moderate viewpoints in the consumers. Now you are a either a racist Republican or a baby-killing Democrat. No middle ground. Kind of sad really.
Excellent post. I've said the same for years. I'd add in the spree shootings as well to this MSM dynamic. In this age of reality TV, instgram models & youtube personalities, everyone wants to be famous, often without doing anything of value. Instead of broadcasting the spree shooter's name, his image, publishing his 'manifesto' for all to read, instead of interviewing his high school classmates or having psychology talk at length about what made the shooter tick, or snap, I'd prefer 2 minutes on the shooting, with no mention of the shooters name. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, the MSM glorifies these killers.
 

Gophers_4life

Active member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
6,215
Reaction score
1
Points
36
Instead of broadcasting the spree shooter's name, his image, publishing his 'manifesto' for all to read, instead of interviewing his high school classmates or having psychology talk at length about what made the shooter tick, or snap, I'd prefer 2 minutes on the shooting, with no mention of the shooters name.
That wouldn’t sell or be consumed at nearly the same rate. You know better.

You subscribe to profit growth, and that’s what it dictates.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe

Over Macho Grande?
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
8,926
Reaction score
784
Points
113
A perfect example of how bad the MSM is now, and how far from journalism the NYT specifically has found itself, was last week when Trump denounced racism, violence & called for unity after the El Paso shooting. The NYT headline read: "Trump urges Unity vs Racism". The NYT readers were so outraged that the NYT didn't intentionally skew the headline to bash Trump, that the NYT had to retract that headline. Let that sink in...The NYT now lets it's readers dictate what news to print. That's not journalism. That's propaganda.
Not a clue why this shouldn't be deeply disturbing to anyone. Although, how dare you for criticizing one of JTF's most heavily cited sources.
 

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
22,208
Reaction score
397
Points
83
Correct me if you disagree but it seems to me the polarizing nature of the media we consume has become a huge impediment to how we treat each other as human beings. Far greater damage is created by media outlets with an agenda than the impact of any one man. We migrate to the viewpoints that we share and consume the opinions of those particular media outlets. Those media outlets have become far less "fair and balanced" and more extreme, thereby creating less rational/moderate viewpoints in the consumers. Now you are a either a racist Republican or a baby-killing Democrat. No middle ground. Kind of sad really.
Perfectly stated.
 

Gopherlife

Active member
Joined
Nov 24, 2018
Messages
941
Reaction score
78
Points
28
Excellent post. I've said the same for years. I'd add in the spree shootings as well to this MSM dynamic. In this age of reality TV, instgram models & youtube personalities, everyone wants to be famous, often without doing anything of value. Instead of broadcasting the spree shooter's name, his image, publishing his 'manifesto' for all to read, instead of interviewing his high school classmates or having psychology talk at length about what made the shooter tick, or snap, I'd prefer 2 minutes on the shooting, with no mention of the shooters name. Whether intentionally or unintentionally, the MSM glorifies these killers.
Taking it one step further, if the media had a conscience and a goal of preventing these things, they would spend a significant amount of time talking about the victims. As it is, little to no focus is placed on the victims.

These killers are starving for attention, but they usually also have an axe to grind with their victims. An awareness that they will not get such recognition AND that their victims be given the recognition would probably be enough to deter some of these psychopaths.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,113
Reaction score
1,261
Points
113
Just read the link below and then checked out the OTB. What an appropriate place to post this with howie’s tweet post above. I couldn’t help but think of howie as I read the linked article:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/50711/klavan-if-youre-outraged-youre-idiot-andrew-klavan

...Outrage Culture is the Left's latest attempt to end an argument they can't win. Leftism wrecks economies and endangers America’s historically unique commitment to individual liberty. Since every leftist ideal from socialism to disarming the populace is a threat to our founding ideals, and since any open debate will expose that threat, the Left spends an inordinate amount of time inventing new strategies to try to force the opposition into silence.

Political correctness is such a strategy: If you don't use our words, you're evil. Calling people racist, white nationalist, white supremacist and Hitler — another strategy: as if the only possible reason you could want to enforce the rule of law at our borders is because you don't like brown people! Pretending to take jokes seriously is yet another strategy. And so on.

This sort of aggressive shut-uppery is in itself a violation of American values. In this great land, we should be able to say, think, debate anything we damn well please. Plus shut-uppery romanticizes the unsaid thing. It threatens to make repugnant philosophies like racism cool because they're forbidden.

But more than anything, shut-uppery makes the Left stupid. When it works, it means they don’t have to test their ideas against opponents of good will. They don’t have to listen, just rant. They can become as insulated, one-sided and willfully ignorant as an editor at The New York Times.

Now, with the speed of the internet, the bias of social media, and the thuggery of the mob to help them, the Left has adopted this new tactic: instant outrage. Whole news days are wasted on over-reactive garbage meant to instill fear and enforce silence...
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
40,425
Reaction score
2,182
Points
113
Just read the link below and then checked out the OTB. What an appropriate place to post this with howie’s tweet post above. I couldn’t help but think of howie as I read the linked article:

https://www.dailywire.com/news/50711/klavan-if-youre-outraged-youre-idiot-andrew-klavan

...Outrage Culture is the Left's latest attempt to end an argument they can't win. Leftism wrecks economies and endangers America’s historically unique commitment to individual liberty. Since every leftist ideal from socialism to disarming the populace is a threat to our founding ideals, and since any open debate will expose that threat, the Left spends an inordinate amount of time inventing new strategies to try to force the opposition into silence.

Political correctness is such a strategy: If you don't use our words, you're evil. Calling people racist, white nationalist, white supremacist and Hitler — another strategy: as if the only possible reason you could want to enforce the rule of law at our borders is because you don't like brown people! Pretending to take jokes seriously is yet another strategy. And so on.

This sort of aggressive shut-uppery is in itself a violation of American values. In this great land, we should be able to say, think, debate anything we damn well please. Plus shut-uppery romanticizes the unsaid thing. It threatens to make repugnant philosophies like racism cool because they're forbidden.

But more than anything, shut-uppery makes the Left stupid. When it works, it means they don’t have to test their ideas against opponents of good will. They don’t have to listen, just rant. They can become as insulated, one-sided and willfully ignorant as an editor at The New York Times.

Now, with the speed of the internet, the bias of social media, and the thuggery of the mob to help them, the Left has adopted this new tactic: instant outrage. Whole news days are wasted on over-reactive garbage meant to instill fear and enforce silence...
Unfortunately- the left can win. They have been doing it incrementally, slow boiling the culture and breaking it down. If they break through and beat Trump, they won't let up, they will accelerate. From here on out they will do this to every conservative opponent. They don't have anything else, they have no policies that work. They want power over the stupid people that they give stuff to in order to keep them in control.
 

bga1

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 20, 2008
Messages
40,425
Reaction score
2,182
Points
113
Actually, it must be sad to be a deceiver having bought into a fraudulent ideology that has no purpose, but that one is addicted to. That is the left. That is you.
 

Gophers_4life

Active member
Joined
Jun 27, 2018
Messages
6,215
Reaction score
1
Points
36
Daily wire - "Led by the incomparable Ben Shapiro, The Daily Wire is a hard-hitting, irreverent news and commentary site for a new generation of conservatives."


Nope. Gross. Not with a ten foot pole. Didn't click on it, didn't read the quoted words. Not going to either.
 

KillerGopherFan

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 15, 2013
Messages
15,113
Reaction score
1,261
Points
113
Daily wire - "Led by the incomparable Ben Shapiro, The Daily Wire is a hard-hitting, irreverent news and commentary site for a new generation of conservatives."


Nope. Gross. Not with a ten foot pole. Didn't click on it, didn't read the quoted words. Not going to either.
Proving that you have the intellectual curiosity of a moron.
 
Top Bottom