NYT is not even trying to pretend.

[Voltaire2]

Two headlines in today’s NYT political coverage:


For Trump, Doug Burgum Emerges as a Safe Option, and a Wild Card

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/09/us/politics/burgum-trump-vp-search.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yU0.2t9-.agNCR908dPVD&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare




Biden Loves to Tell Tall Tales. We Cut Them Down to Size.

https://www.nytimes.com/2024/06/09/us/politics/biden-history-fact-check.html?unlocked_article_code=1.yU0.KRCO.YamKRGxTvUtz&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

The first headline promotes Trump as a responsible serious presidential candidate.

The second headline portrays Biden as a goofball.

[StopTheNeoCons]

1. Should title read "NYT is not even trying to pretend."?

[Voltaire2]

2. Thanks.

[Lonestarblue]

21. Well, Biden had a recent interview with Time magazine, so Sulzberger is attacking Biden again.

He should stop and think about why our president would give the paper that has been bashing him on age and potential senility for the last year the reward of a personal interview. The Times has also published numerous pieces over the past years exhorting Democrats to kick Biden to the curb and select a better, younger candidate. I guess having a family paper ensures that you can make your own news.

[RazorbackExpat]

3. So much for the 'liberal media'

[AllaN01Bear]

4. dump the american corperate new$greedia.

[jimfields33]

12. +1,000,000

[LAS14]

18. What is your alternative? Who other than MSM can...

... afford to gather news from all over the world?

[ZZenith]

26. There's this thing called "Google"

where you can look up news sources from all over the globe and read from them directly. It’s awesome.

[LAS14]

30. And which of the sources you find on Google...

... do you trust more than Wapo, the NYT and PBS/NPR? And why? How much time do you spend each day surveying the world's news outlets? These are all real questions, not me stating an opinion disguised as a question.

[ZZenith]

33. I check other country's news sources all the time.

I trust the Washington Post and The New York Times not in the least. Their track record in the past several decades has been abysmal compared to what they use to be. I learn to trust or not trust news sources based on what they choose to cover and what they choose to ignore - history has a way of revealing the shortcomings of the news agencies of the time. Der Angriff, for example, got just about everything wrong.

I can trust NPR to run segments that are interesting but ultimately meaningless, as they always seem so reluctant to rock the boats of their corporate sponsors. EVERY news agency is going to reflect the bias of the person who signs the paychecks - that’s understood. Your comment seemed to indicate that the average person has no way of accessing what’s happening in the world because they don’t possess a huge news agency, which is simply no longer the case.

[LAS14]

34. I'm afraid I need an aggregator. nt

[Layzeebeaver]

5. I've never bought or read the NYT

Might have a copy placed under my ass when I'm dead and buried - that's all it's worth in my opinion.

[ramen]

6. From the second paragraph of the second article,

which is a specifically labeled fact check article (whereas the first article you linked to is a detailed biographical story about that possible running mate of the other guy):

"Despite Mr. Biden’s penchant for exaggerating details when recounting episodes from his life, these autobiographical embellishments differ in scale and significance from the stream of lies about a stolen election peddled by his opponent, former President Donald J. Trump."

I don't see how one can read that article and think it is bias or bothsidesing. The authors are totally clear that there is no equivalence between fluffing up a story for rhetorical effect and deliberately and constantly manufacturing bullshit, as they very directly state the would-be dictator does.

[wolfie001]

8. You know how to glean information

Most idiots only see a headline and by then, their mind has been sold a bill of goods. "30,000 emails" being a prime example. That being said, if a particular NYT article is free, I may read it. Sadly, I don't consider them a reliable media outfit. (maGGie haGGerman?)

[Voltaire2]

9. And yet we have two headlines.

One promotes Trump being a serious person. One portrays Biden as a goofball.

The article contents are basically irrelevant.

[jaxexpat]

14. The headline, like the bumper sticker is the takeaway. No matter the context or content.

Another great reason we're a very stupid society.

[ramen]

22. Hang on, a news article is irrelevant and only a headline matters? Why even have journalism at that point?

That is just not how news works.

[Voltaire2]

24. Ok, yes the content obviously matters, that was hyperbole on my part.

However the headline is what creates the framing of that content, and in fact many people, now even more than the pre-internet era, only see the headlines.

The headline itself is frequently an editorial decision.

[Elessar Zappa]

28. Yes,

even on this site, some posters only read the thread titles and not the content of the post.

[erronis]

13. Apparently the PR/propagandists have figured out that the headline is what counts

People get that message in large print and bold, then may or may not read parts of the article. The weak brained ones will get most of their "info" from the headline.

[Voltaire2]

15. This has been true for at least 100 years.

The science of persuasion developed alongside and in conjunction with the development of mass media, from newspapers through film radio and television, and onto the internet and social media.

[whathehell]

35. My understanding is that at least one of a headline's

purposes is to "sum" up a news story for those who may not have the time to read the entire article..It's not all about "stupid" societies and "low information voters".

[VeryProgressive]

20. It's the Headline

It's the headline that is what matters. Many people don't read the substance of an article. It's a tricky way for a news organization to provide plausible deniability. The headline in this case, focuses on Biden's penchant for exaggeration. Many low information voters don't read the entire article.

[ramen]

23. A news organization can't fix what people choose not to read of their news.

And that disclaimer being paragraph 2 of that article is plenty early to show they are not trying to hide slant.

There is some obvious bias in parts of the NYT (looking at you Maggie Haberman) but this just isn't it.

[Voltaire2]

25. totally missing the point

newspaper editors are very much aware of the importance of the wording of their headlines and their placement.

The obvious bias of the new york times goes way beyond Habberman's intimate relationship with the Trump family. It has been widely reported that Sulzberger remains pissed off by the refusal of Biden to do the apparently obligatory 'sit down interview' with the newspaper.

[LymphocyteLover]

7. Sickening. This isn't even "both sides". It's outright normalization of fascism.

[Just Jerome]

10. Poor poor pitiful NYT

Their fee-fees got hurt because Biden would not do an interview. But their
birthright! And now they’re mad. Because they’re sad.

GO TO LAMESTREAM HELL, YOU GREEDY BASTARDS !

[Warpy]

16. The Grey Lady has been whoring on the QT since the last years of Vietnam

which is when I stopped bothering, going to an out of town news stand for the Boston Globe or the Wa Po when I was there.

She's just gotten a little to long in the tooth to pass it off as dating. Also, her regulars no longer give a shit about her reputation.

The NYT is the preferred paper for the movers and shakers and the people who want to take over. It has become about as reliable as the Post but without pictures.

[LAS14]

17. I do believe these are opinion pieces.

Where would we be without large, well-funded news organizations that put a premium on honest. And on not limiting their readers to a bubble? We need the press more than ever.

[Voltaire2]

19. Neither were in the editorial or oped sections

Both were featured on the first page of the online version and are published in the 2024 campaign section. Neither is presented as an ‘opinion’ piece.

[Hermit-The-Prog]

36. We need a competitive press, not a few conglomerates promoting the oligarchs' interests.

[LAS14]

37. Who do you recommend that we support? I'm absolutely...

... all for trying to revive the local press. How can we have democracy without people saying who they want on their town council or school board? But I don't know how we promote competitors for the big guys.

[budkin]

27. The good news is that most people who read the NYT

Will be voting for Biden regardless of the bullshit.

[LetMyPeopleVote]

29. I am glad that I cancelled my subscription to this rag back in 2015

This rag wants to re-elect TFG

[LAS14]

31. Absurd. Do you really believe that? nt

[senseandsensibility]

32. And they wonder why Biden won't give them an interview

They'll likely whine and present biased coverage like this until the election. It may even get worse.