A tweet that perfectly explains why I canceled my NYT digital subscription...

[Miles Archer]

Parker Molloy
@ParkerMolloy

Good thing you guys were so cautious in not overhyping Barr’s memo. It’s not like you published a giant front page headline stating that Barr’s report was a perfect and accurate telling of Mueller’s report, right @nytimes?

Link to tweet

[manor321]

1. Everyone should cancel their NYT subscription

Even today's story ridiculously carries water for Barr. They won't change unless the money is taken away.

[Miles Archer]

2. They ride your ass until you tell them WHY you are canceling, so I told them.

It was this ridiculous Trump fanboy article from Peter Baker:

This was the email I sent to Carina in customer care, who asked me if I was sure if I wanted to cancel:

Carina,

The answer is pretty straightforward…I don’t pay to read conservative journalism, conservative “opinion,” or in the case of your writer Peter Baker, conservative “analysis.”

For the record, the article was:

"A Cloud Over Trump’s Presidency Is Lifted" By Peter Baker

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/03/24/us/politics/trump-robert-mueller.html

The cloud hasn’t been lifted…there are multiple investigations continuing in the House, as well as SDNY.

It’s borderline Fox News. I’m not going to discuss politics with you. Suffice it to say that I lean much further to Lawrence O’Donnell and much further away from Sean Hannity. There are unanswered questions here. A.G. Barr wrote a lengthy and unsolicited diatribe which railed against the Mueller investigation. Now we…as well as members of Congress…are being told to “trust” his four-page summation. I’d rather see the report and draw my own conclusions, or at minimum, get it the hands of every member of Congress.

So, essentially, you can tell Peter Baker that I read his article and canceled my subscription.

Yes, I am sure. Please cancel it as I requested.

Thank you.

[MyOwnPeace]

4. Nicely done, sir!

[Miles Archer]

5. Thank you

[malaise]

6. Nicely done

It's why I never had a NYT subscription

[Miles Archer]

7. Thanks Malaise

I tried...I put up with Haberman...but the shift to Trump is just too damned dramatic, across the boards.

[ToxMarz]

13. I find it easier to just notify them to cancel and then quit paying them.

I don't really care what they want

[ellie]

3. The NY Times is garbage

I tweet this fact at them regularly.

[UniteFightBack]

20. Please stop repeating right wing talking points. Thanks ! nt

[Scurrilous]

8. K&R

[lindysalsagal]

9. I like wapo.

[B Stieg]

14. Me, too. nt

[Sparkly]

10. I canceled after the 2000 Bush v. Gore fiasco

NYTimes was instrumental in helping W throughout that campaign.

(Anybody else remember MWO? God I miss it!!!)

[Crunchy Frog]

11. Yes, I remember Media Whores Online.

Nice seeing you around again.

[Sparkly]

12. Hi, Crunchy!

[SunSeeker]

15. It's infuriating.

[FailureToCommunicate]

16. So...if everyone cancels their Times subscription how will they pay the reporters that DO

the work our democracy desperately needs?

Newspapers can't just write the stuff you want to read.

Sometimes they get it wrong, but their reporters are essential.

[SCantiGOP]

18. But a lot of posts here

Are endorsing the SOP of other side : ignore any media that you do not agree with 100% of the time.

[Miles Archer]

22. I didn't encourage everyone to cancel their Times subscription

And even if I did, who am I, you know? I'm not in charge of what people pay for.

I felt that the NYT jumped on the "full exoneration" bandwagon, and it wasn't just that one article.

At some point, when this blows over, I may subscribe again.

But for now, I'm not paying for articles that discuss how a cloud has been lifted and Trump is now free to march to victory in 2020.

Yes, they got it wrong, and I'm taking a time out until they get it right.

[FailureToCommunicate]

23. Oh, I agree with your main point. (Heck I grew up with NYT since a kid, so, MANY times...

I grumbled about their coverage, headlines or editorials.)

My comments were more directed at the numerous replies to your OP where it seems folks were jumping on the unsubscribe bandwagon.

My brother was a reporter, so I know (we all know really) that there are hard working journalists that are firmly dedicated to pursueing the story, the facts and truth of a subject. Then along come the headline editors to twist things...

[Power 2 the People]

34. +1

[LAS14]

40. +1

[NBachers]

17. "Democrats vow to push ahead and investigate" means "Losers grumble and pout in their locker room"

That's The Times' implication, as I see it.

[UniteFightBack]

19. Sure lets just toss away the paper of record because you didn't like their headline one day

which is technically correct. But please keep on keeping on with your anti media....all you are doing is helping rump.

EYE ROLL

[Miles Archer]

21. Inaccurate on every level.

1). I didn't say "lets just toss away the paper of record because I didn't like their headline one day." I said that I was going to stop paying for a digital subscription. Big difference, I also mentioned that that one article was the one that made me decide to cancel, but it was a shift in their overall journalistic stance that brought me to that point.

2). "But please keep on keeping on with your anti media"...one post? Seriously? One post and I'm Paul Revere, riding through the countryside, demanding that my fellow villagers rip up their copies of the NYT? And 'anti media?" When did I become "anti media?"

3). "all you are doing is helping rump..." Thank you so much. Read some of the other 15,000 posts I have on DU and show me other examples of how I'm helping Trump.

"Have a nice day."

EYE ROLL

[Maven]

24. I live in NYC and subscribe to WaPo

The NYT is not the 'paper of record' anymore. They are the 'paper of fluffing the oligarchy' and the 'paper of maintaining access to Trump' and the 'paper of soft-focus profiles on white supremacists', certainly.

Don't get me wrong: there are plenty of great journalists who still work there. But they also have a lot of hacks like Maggie Haberman and Peter Baker who live to smear Democrats with innuendo and downplay scandals and outright crimes by Republicans. Their editorial policy is poison. Dean Baquet has totally ruined the paper's reputation.

[UniteFightBack]

38. The papers reputation is ruined with whom? Please. So sorry it's not up to your standards.

So both you and rump agree that the NYT sucks. Gee I don't even have to ask what you think about CNN.

[Maven]

39. I'm not the only person who has noticed the degradation of the Times' journalistic integrity

Their willingness to normalize right-wing extremism and unwillingness to call RW lies "lies" have been noted and criticized, rightly, by many.

And CNN is a joke now. Jeff Zucker has turned it into a reality TV/news/infotainment hybrid and has given a platform for Trump propagandists like Corey Lewandowski, Kayleigh McEnany, Jeffrey Lord and others to spread disinformation. He has actually paid professional liars to say outrageous crap on air to stir the pot for ratings. And let's not forget the hours of Trump's hate rallies that they broadcast during the last election.

It is not Trumpian to ask the media to do a better job of informing the public. That is good-faith criticism. Trump attacks the media in bad faith to manipulate and delegitimize their coverage. If you can't see the difference, then that's too bad. You can excuse low standards, but I won't. It's those low standards that got us Trump in the first place.

[Irishxs]

30. Agree, UniteFightBack

[brooklynite]

25. 2018 Pulitzer Prizes

The New York Times, for reporting led by Jodi Kantor and Megan Twohey, and The New Yorker, for reporting by Ronan Farrow
For explosive, impactful journalism that exposed powerful and wealthy sexual predators, including allegations against one of Hollywood’s most influential producers, bringing them to account for long-suppressed allegations of coercion, brutality and victim silencing, thus spurring a worldwide reckoning about sexual abuse of women.

Staffs of The New York Times and The Washington Post
For deeply sourced, relentlessly reported coverage in the public interest that dramatically furthered the nation’s understanding of Russian interference in the 2016 presidential election and its connections to the Trump campaign, the President-elect’s transition team and his eventual administration. (The New York Times entry, submitted in this category, was moved into contention by the Board and then jointly awarded the Prize.)

Jake Halpern, freelance writer, and Michael Sloan, freelance cartoonist, The New York Times
For an emotionally powerful series, told in graphic narrative form, that chronicled the daily struggles of a real-life family of refugees and its fear of deportation.

[50 Shades Of Blue]

26. I canceled mine awhile back over some crap they printed about Mueller too.

It was ridiculous how hard it was to cancel!

[librechik]

27. bastards! I quit them long ago--

over the Judith Miller lies!

[Irishxs]

28. NYT is a good paper that made a mistake.

I was pretty upset when they hired Brett Stephens, but now I find that he sometimes adds another side I hadn’t thought of. Don’t throw the baby out with the bathwater.

[Maven]

33. One mistake is a mistake. Multiple 'mistakes' start to become a pattern.

It's not just this one instance of bad headline-writing. It's this:

https://www.vox.com/2017/12/7/16747712/study-media-2016-election-clintons-emails

It's this:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/erik-wemple/wp/2018/05/16/new-york-times-acknowledges-it-buried-the-lead-in-pre-election-russia-trump-story/?utm_term=.5dbfcfb8c6c7

It's this:

https://www.nytimes.com/2017/11/25/us/ohio-hovater-white-nationalist.html

And let's not forget this:

http://nymag.com/nymetro/news/media/features/9226/

And much more.

Something is seriously wrong at the NYT.

[Irishxs]

31. Do we want a paper that only tells us what we want (trump & fox news) or

do we want a paper that is truthful?

[ProfessorPlum]

32. "a paper that is truthful"

is that what the NYT is in this specific case?

[LAS14]

41. +1

[Tipperary]

35. I have subscribed to the NYTimes for years and years.

I do not always agree with what they print, but I find them a good source of information.

I also subscribe to WaPo.

[RelativelyJones]

36. Your choice, but no way I'm cancelling my subscription to the NYT.

Trashing it wholesale sounds like a right wing talking point to me.

[moondust]

37. Where were they in 2015-16?

Dump has a long history of shady deals and bad behavior. Who would have known better where to look for anything that might disqualify someone from the highest office in the land than the hometown rag with connections to the business community, banks, city hall, and the state AG? If I had to take a *wild* guess it would probably be that Wall Street leaned on Times management to lay off him because Dump would be good for business and stocks (because he's corrupt and incompetent).