Altercation: Has The New York Times Learned From Its Trump-Era Disasters?

[babylonsister]

The American Prospect
Home Politics
Altercation: Has The New York Times Learned From Its Trump-Era Disasters?
There is little sign the new executive editor Joseph Kahn is going to reckon with what the Republican Party really is.
by Eric Alterman
April 22, 2022


Newspapers are both watchdogs of the powerful and curators of what John Dewey called democracy’s “culture of conversation.”

Dean Baquet’s tenure as New York Times executive editor was a smashing success in many respects. He came in after the brief and tumultuous period led by Jill Abramson and not only steadied the metaphorical ship, but also calmed the no less metaphorical waters. He appears to have been well liked and respected among those who worked either directly with or close to him. (He was always very decent in his dealings with me.) Just as importantly, he significantly improved the Times’ financial outlook, and in the process not only the Sulzberger family’s nerves but also the state of its employees’ 401(k)s. Had he not accomplished this last task, he could not have undertaken the many journalistic innovations that allow the Times to continue its dominant status as almost certainly the world’s most influential source of news.

snip//


Blessed with the biggest market of all, the Times recently reached ten million subscriptions with the addition of The Athletic, which, along with the addictive puzzle game Wordle, it recently purchased. The company now employs 5,000 people and enjoys an annual revenue of over $2 billion. But “most influential” even when combined with “most profitable” does not always mean the best. To be clear, the Times genuinely is the best of American journalism in many respects. Chief among these is its commitment to expensive, time-consuming (and usually money-losing) investigative journalism.

But I feel certain that when historians look back at the period during which Baquet led the most influential news organization on Earth, his failure to confront the Republican Party’s attempt to abolish American democracy and replace it with a homegrown form of fascism will be his most significant legacy.

more...

https://prospect.org/politics/altercation-has-new-york-times-learned-from-trump-era-disasters/

[abqtommy]

1. No. I don't consider The NYT to be a reliable news source. nt

[agingdem]

5. not for a long time...

Last edited Sat Apr 23, 2022, 08:07 AM - Edit history (1)

if the NYT ever had something resembling a "soul", Dean Baquet sold it for access (the vile Maggie Haberman comes to mind)...and for a paper that had a history of ridiculing all things Trump, the paper's hypocrisy was obvious..and it was also obvious from their snarky coverage the paper of record hated the Clintons, Hillary in particular, and chose to gloss over or excuse Trump's narcissistic psychopathy, his ignorance, his overt racism, his depravity...he was cleaned up and "sold" as a viable candidate, capable of growing into the job...and then Trump did what Trump does best, he turned on the NYT and it's management...fake news, failing paper...it's not surprising the NYT management ignored the Republican threat to our democracy...there was no money in it..

[CountMyVote4Reality]

8. +1

[Septua]

2. The discussion...

..is above my pay grade. I just read the results of the investigative journalism and applaud the results.

[onecaliberal]

3. It's propaganda for the fascist party.

[Takket]

4. This account has 150k followers, just from mocking awful NYT reporting

That should tell you how the NYT is perceived.

Link to tweet

?s=21

[calimary]

7. "The Bridges of Madison Cawthorn"'

OMG!

[BeyondGeography]

6. Paying to read Ross Douthat and Bret Stephens

Which speaks to the underlying relativism of all of its editorial coverage is getting old.

Then there’s the fearmongering, which has been really bad of late. When Russia was flailing north of Kyiv, the Times had headline after headline about the massive Russian army nearing Kyiv. Finally Eliot Cohen of The Atlantic wrote a piece called Ukraine is Winning This War and others starts speaking out, specifically about the Times. Then their coverage changed. What does that tell you?

Today’s coverage of the French election was basically an exercise in reviving Le Pen and talking down Macron, with only slight nods to the polls, which uniformly show him winning by double digits.

I’m fed up. It’s my hometown paper and it will take a lot for me to finally cut the cord. But I’m getting there.

[hatrack]

11. Dumped them a few years back . . .

One Cletus Safari too many.

[Achilleaze]

9. The Times failed miserably to hold Republicans/Russians to account

Whimped out. Shame on them for their fuzz, misdirection, BothSiderism, and neglect.

[maxrandb]

10. "So Mrs Lincoln, how was the play"?

[Hortensis]

12. Learned?! Bottom line: they WON. The top people are still there,

including executive editor Dean Baquet, who presided over the NYT's actions to keep and put Republicans in power in 2015-16 to present.

[llashram]

13. ++

the NYT and most MSM showed their real colours (red and yellow)during trumps 4 years. Great post