NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the time

Discuss local, regional, state, federal, and world politics. Keep it classy, Cleveland.

NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the time

Postby Michaels153 » December 26th, 2019, 9:04 am

https://townhall.com/tipsheet/mattvespa/2019/12/25/ny-post-columnist-we-should-investigate-why-the-new-york-times-is-wrong-all-the-time-n2558526
As reported by Matt Vespa

Now I will be the first to admit the use of hyperbole here in the NY Post column. The Times does report the weather, sports and other areas with a fair amount of accuracy. But the gist of this column is an interesting note and begs the question of why? Why would what almost is not questioned; why would America's best paper, accept the endless false reporting they have done, losing readership, and advertisers, and staff, and not stop it. And I do believe that the false reporting can be stopped, immediately.

Someone mentioned this on social media. In fact, many have when it comes to The New York Times and others peddling caught peddling fake news. I mean it’s become abysmal since the 2016 election. Granted, a blind squirrel finds a nut. The publication can dole out some solid pieces—not doubt. The Upshot is a decent section, but the batting average isn’t good. And yes, it’s a liberal paper. I’m sure you all know this but there are some folks out there who think the NYT, MSNBC, and CNN are impartial sources of news. You almost have the chuckle a bit. Yet, when you get egg on your face for the 10,000thtime, maybe there needs to be an internal review. That’s what The New York Post’sMichael Goodwin suggested due to the paper’s serial failures while adding that Trump is Teflon. He will not be taken down by the snowflake brigade that infests so many newsrooms. He also added that if Democrats thought their liberal media allies will be able to drum up support for impeachment, they were sadly mistaken (via NY Post):

Backed by a press corps eager to get Trump, Pelosi felt confident to authorize the flimsy effort to remove the president from office. She assumed media bullhorns would push the public into her camp and that would win her Republican votes for a bipartisan takedown.

She certainly got the media support, but the public and the GOP aren’t following. Indeed, the harder that Reps. Adam Schiff and Jerry Nadler push and the louder the anti-Trump media scream, the more the public resists impeachment over the Ukraine piffle.

That was true even before last week’s sensational revelations that the FBI was both corrupt and incompetent in the Russia collusion probe. The report and testimony by Michael Horowitz, the inspector general of the Justice Department, further undermined impeachment by revealing the rampant misconduct in the earlier case.

[…]

Thankfully, the accountability fallout from the Russia misconduct has started, with Attorney General Bill Barr suggesting possible prosecutions of FBI agents and perhaps others.

But what of the media? After all, The New York Times, Washington Post, CNN and the broadcast networks were spectacularly wrong in their coverage.

[…]

Pulitzers and other journalism prizes lionized some reports that are now as discredited as the Steele dossier. Yet the news organizations still protect the secret sources who misled them and act as if they themselves did nothing wrong.

One glaring example. The Times reported last May that the FBI sent a female investigator “posing as research assistant” to spy on the Trump campaign in 2016. The woman, who called herself Azra Turk, met with George Papadopoulos in a London bar.

[…]

The Times’ story also says Turk and another informant, Stefan Halper, “failed to glean any information of value” from several meetings with Papadopoulos, but that is not true, according to the inspector general. He says one of the FBI’s most significant “inaccuracies and omissions” was the failure to tell FISA judges that Papadopoulos repeatedly denied to Halper and Turk that the campaign was collaborating with Russia or WikiLeaks. This is the equivalent of Brady material. The Woods process of examining the accuracy of all the material in each FISA warrant renewals. These were not done as IG Horowitz's report revealed. I am still not certain that the New York Times has admitted this.

Did the Times reporters know about that exculpatory information, or did their FBI sources lie to them? Either way, the paper now knows its May story was wrong on key points, yet it remains uncorrected. Again, why? Is there really more money to be gained from printing lie after lie when eventually the truth is found out? I just can not see a logical reason for this. If there are an endless supply of advertisers to replace any you might lose along the way, then why are you making cut backs in staffing? Why are they hinting at going more and more digital?

[…]

Days after the 2016 election, the Times issued an apology of sorts to subscribers for failing to realize that Trump could win. “Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?” the publisher and editor wrote.

[…]

So now it’s time for a second apology — a sincere one. And an honest inquiry into how the paper continues to get the big stories so wrong.
Such an apology is long overdue, but even being the optimist that I am, I just do not see the NY Times issuing this type of an apology.

I mean the list of how many times the liberal media has stepped on a rake when covering this administration could stretch from New York to San Francisco. It’s got to the point where even voters who lean Democratic in swing states refuse to believe what’s being printed about the president. It’s that bad.

It really is that bad. I asked Leftyg, in another thread, why should anybody believe anything the Democratic Party says anymore, and I think the same thing should be asked of The New York Times. Yes there are other papers, magazines, radio, and television stations that could be asked the same thing. To the public, the basic question to them is: If ...X... is willing to lie so often about the big stuff, what else may they be lying about?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 26th, 2019, 7:23 pm

Michaels, it is the news you listen to on Fox and Rush Limbaugh that is propaganda. All you are giving me is opinion from an opinion writer at the highly partisan, highly questionable Townhall website. I don't want to do this little tit for tat on one claims after another that you often throw out. I think it is much more effective to debate one or two ideas at a time but do them in more depth. I think that is how we can build a readership over here, and I think that is what you want as well as me.

Matt Vespa's argument is not very convincing. The NY Times depends on factual information as do CNN and MSNBC Some of Mr. Vespa's assertions make me question whether he presents factual assertions himself. He talks about the NY Times "serial failures." Calling the impeachment evidence "flimsy" is silly. Trump did in fact ask Ukraine to "help us" before aid was released. New documents showed that 90 minutes after Trump's July 25th call to Zelensky, aides at Trump's White House attempted to put the aid on hold https://fox8.com/2019/12/22/effort-to-f ... -zelensky/ And those assertions are merely confirmed by other behind the scenes machinations. Mick Malvaney admitted to this in this video https://www.npr.org/2019/10/17/77097965 ... -conflicts The time line is suspicious at best https://www.vox.com/policy-and-politics ... stleblower And Trump himself said that he would accept help from a foreign country in his interview with George Stephanopolous when he told Stephanopolous that "I think I would take it" in reference to a question about whether he would take political help from a foreign country against a domestic political opponent. https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/id-excl ... d=63669304 So calling Peosi's evidence flimsy is weak at best.

Vespa asserts (without backup that Pelosi
assumed media bullhorns would push the public into her camp and that would win her Republican votes for a bipartisan takedown... but the public and the GOP aren’t following.
which of course is simley not true. Most polls have support for impeachment at around 50% https://www.politico.com/news/2019/12/2 ... ent-088812

Contrast this with 1998 when a vast majority of the public did not want impeachment of Bill Clinton
[T]he majority of Americans (64%) did not support impeachment. And three days before Mr. Clinton was impeached, his approval rating was a high 63%, according to Gallup.
Sp Vespa, like Trump, is lying. Conservatives do not want to admit that in some legitimate polls as high a s 55% of the public want Trump impeached and removed from office https://www.businessinsider.com/poll-ma ... ed-2019-12
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » December 27th, 2019, 8:19 am

Good morning Leftyg.
First, you still cling to your position of Fox News and Rush Limbaugh being propaganda. Your wrong. And your continued obstinance in this is not flattering. If The New York Times was as accurate as Fox and Rush have been over the past three years, they would not be going through the problems they have, and continue to have. And, behind closed doors, If their accuracy was in a pill form they would buy it.
I too, do not want a tit for tat dialogue between us over this or any other issue. We have had some very good discussions on some issues and I would like us to return to that point.
Now as to this column, that Matt Vespa is reporting on. (He was not the author, the NY Post was. He is just commenting on it)
You may recall that for me this is not a new topic. I have not been targeting the NY Times, but I have come out against the increasing number of false reporting wherever it occurs, especially in science. I recently offered my solutions in Remedy for Fake News.
All that being said, We come down to the commentary on the Times. Do you think they are becoming as CNN is now? Accepting both as liberal leaning, they both seemed to be agenda driven when it comes to President Trump.
Is it not fair to ask where this is all going? And, when will it end?
Bill Kristol committed journalistic suicide in his ant-trump agenda with his magazine. George Will has been relegated to his the closet in his basement.
So, again, I ask you, where do you think this is going?
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 27th, 2019, 12:48 pm

I think that the New York Times' biases are wherever the facts are at. I think the same is true of most news organizations. Conservative anger at the messenger is quite funny. Journalists re going to report what they find. That is not true of columnists and talk show hosts. They generally follow their biases. Also it occurs to me that you would be much further ahead going after the New York Post because it is a tabloid type journal.

What false statements has the NY Times made? Most of the stuff on science is opinion. Neither side can lie on Evolution because it is a theory and because most people really do not know what they are talking about anyway, and ignorance is always a way out of being called a liar.

But what about current events or politics have they lied about? Be specific.. Like I said, Matt Vespa or the New York Post were both wrong about the "flimsy" evidence against Trump. The evidence was factual and well documented with Trump even admitting he would do it and did do it to ABC News and to the entire press corp on the White House lawn and through his own chief of staff.

There is no need to remedy Fake News at the New York Times because I have not seen any and you have not alerted me to any.

The Fake News is with Trump, and I choose to call it propaganda. He and his emissaries are the purveyors. That is why I regularly go after Bob Frantz. But the flat out falsehoods are stunning. Trump says the economy was a mess when he took over which is not true. Unemployment rates were dropping, deficits were dropping. https://www.bls.gov/charts/employment-s ... t-rate.htm

It is profoundly irresponsible to say that President Obama was not a citizen https://www.cnn.com/2016/09/09/politics ... index.html https://www.politifact.com/subjects/oba ... tatements/ Why did Trump tell these vicious and baseless lies? The proof that Trump is lying is that Obama has an Hawiian birth certificate https://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=8191566&page=1

And what about the absurd assertion that Obama bugged Trump's headquarters in Trump Tower? https://www.nytimes.com/2017/03/04/us/p ... hones.html Here the Times takes a Trump lie and corrects it. He had no evidence that Obama bugged his residence; he just made it up. He cannot go around lying and making false charges about people.

You mention Bill Kristol and George Will. Both are intelligent conservatives who cannot stand the constant violations of the Constitution. Their integrity is intact. The question is have those who cling on to Trump still have their integrity, and to me the answer is a resounding "no!"
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » December 28th, 2019, 2:47 pm

Okay i was wrong. there is no chance in having a good conversation with you.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 29th, 2019, 2:05 am

Okay i was wrong. there is no chance in having a good conversation with you.
I addressed several of your ideas about the "lies' the NY Times allegedly tells. How then can you say that you cannot have a good conversation with me. I probably will not agree with you, but what you said was unfair.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » December 31st, 2019, 12:52 am

Crickets from Michaels. I guess he chooses not to defend his hero.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 8th, 2020, 1:36 pm

leftyg wrote: #1) I think that the New York Times' biases are wherever the facts are at. ...

October 25, 2019 - The Times reported that Durham's probe was politically tainted without evidence. (Durham's probe has not been released yet. The Times reported on Durham's probe, sight unseen. That is not "biases are wherever the facts are at") https://www.foxnews.com/politics/john-d ... inal-probe

#2) Journalists re going to report what they find.

Obviously if the Durham probe has not even been released yet and is sight unseen, then the Times reporter who said that Durham probe is tainted without evidence is not reporting on what they found.

#3) What false statements has the NY Times made?

The Times dismissed reporter Joe Drape whose original reports on the Duke Lacrosse Case tended to exonerate the accused players (who were falsely accused of Rape.) Mr Drape's reports contradicted the Times editorial stance. This led to Mr. Drapes quick dismissal. He was replaced by Duff Wilson who took a pro-prosecution stance. Ms. Selma Roberts was a sports writer for the Times and she made assertions that "something happened on March 13". She wrote: "Players have been forced to give up their DNA, but to the dismay of the investigators, none have come forward to reveal an eyewitness account." That was not true. [When Peer Pressure, Not a Conscience, Is Your Guide. by Selena Roberts New York Times, March 31, 2006. On April 6, 2006 The Times printed a correction to this false statement.
Daniel Okrent, former Times Ombudsman admitted to the bias in the Times coverage of the case. He said; "It was too delicious a story. It conformed too well to too many preconceived notions of too many in the press: White over Black, rich over poor, athletes over non-athletes, men over women, educated over non-educated. Wow! That's a package of sins that really fit the preconceptions of a lot of us.
See also: http://www.newsbusters.org/blogs/clay-w ... e-coverage
New Book destroys credibility of New York Times Duke Lacrosse Coverage.

On February 21, 2008 The New York Times published an article on John McCain'. In the article it stated that Mr. McCain had an inappropriate relationship with Vicki Iseman. Tom Rosentiel, the director of the Project for Excellence In Journalism, suggested "the article does not make clear the nature of McCain's inappropriate behavior. The phrasing is just so vague. The Times also included in this article a reference to the Keating Five scandal (which both John McCain and John Glenn were cleared of any wrong doing.) Clark Hoyt, the Times public editor, concluded: I think it is wrong to report the suppositions or concerns of anonymous aides about whether the boss is getting into the wrong bed."
https://www.nytimes.com/2008/02/24/opin ... ed.html?hp What the McCain Article Didn't Say by The Public Editor Clark Hoyt
The newspaper found itself in the uncomfortable position of being the story as much as publishing the story, in large part because, although it raised one of the most toxic subjects in politics — sex — it offered readers no proof that McCain and Iseman had a romance.

Vicki Iseman sued the New York Times. Wikipedia reports that the suit was settled in February 2009.
https://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/busi ... wsuit.html
The Times agreed to publish a statement from Ms. Iseman's lawyer on the Times website. There was no inappropriate relationship. That was false.

#4) But what about current events or politics have they lied about? Be specific..
https://www.foxnews.com/media/cenk-uygur-david-duke-new-york-times-lie
Cenk Uygar slams "unconscionable' New York Times report suggesting he defended David Duke, calling it a Lie. By Joseph A. Wulfsohn of Fox News
The Times reported on an interview that Mr. Uygar had done on his progressive digital outlet The Young Turks with David Duke. In that interview, Mr. Duke ends the interview saying, "I am not, what you call a racist." to which Mr. Uygar replies: "No, of course not." which appeared to have been said sarcastically. Time reporter Jennifer Medina, nor the Times, immediately responded to Fox News for comment. (Mr. Uygar sent a tape of the show to this reporter at the Times so that she could see the entire interview)

#5) There is no need to remedy Fake News at the New York Times because I have not seen any and you have not alerted me to any.

In 2003, The Times admitted that Jayson Blair, one of its reporters, had committed repeated journalistic fraud over a span of several years. The general professionalism of the paper was questioned.
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/05/11/nati ... &position=
Correcting the Record: Times reporter who resigned leaves long trail of deception. By The New York Times
- Wikipedia "The New York Times Controversies" https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_New_York_Times_controversies
No need to remedy? Where was the oversight to check the facts and the sources before his work went to print?

In 1920, Walter Lippman and Charles Merz investigated the New York Times news coverage of the Russian Revolution from 1917 to 1920.
Liberty and the News. Courier Corporation. ISBN 978-0-486-13636-3.
The study was published a s a supplement to the New Republic and concluded that the Times reporting was neither unbiased nor accurate. The newspapers news stories were not based on facts, but were determined by the hopes of the men who made up the news organisations. The newspaper referred to events that had not taken place, atrocities that did not exist, and reported no fewer than 91 times that the Bolshevik regime was on the verge of collapse. Lippmann and Merz noted critically: "The main censor and the main propagandist was the hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors."
Auerbach, Jonathan; Castronovo, Russ (November 13, 2013). The Oxford Handbook of Propaganda Studies. Oxford University Press. ISBN 978-0-19-933185-7.


In 1990, The New York Times, which submitted the work of Walter Duranty for the Pulitzer Prize in 1932, wrote: "In his later articles denying the famine constituted some of the worst reporting to appear in this newspaper. https://query.nytimes.com/gst/fullpage. ... A966958260 The Editorial Notebook: Trenchcoats, Then and Now. The New York Times Editorial on Walter Duranty
The Times sent Von Hagen's report to the Pulitzer Board and left it to the board to take whatever action they considered appropriate.
https://www.usatoday.com/news/nation/20 ... tzer_x.htm New York Times urged to rescind 1932 Pulitzer
In a letter accompanying the report, The New York Times publisher Arthur Ochs Salzberger Jr. called Duranty's work "slovenly" and said it should have been recognized for what it was by his editors and by his Pulitzer judges seven decades ago.


August 15, 2019 New York Times chief outlines coverage shift: From Trump-Russia to Trump Racism. By Byron York.
https://www.realclearpolitics.com/2019/08/16/nyt_chief_on_trump_coverage_shift_from_russia_to_racism_483457.html
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 it's coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism.
We built our newsroom to cover one story and we did it well, Baquet said....That was a really hard story by the way, let's not forget that. We set ourselves up to cover that story. I'm going to say it, we won two Pulitzer Prizes covering that story. (Remember Walter Duranty)
....Baquet used the gentlest terms possible - "the story changed" - but the fact is, the conspiracy - coordination allegation the Times had devoted itself to pursuing turned out to be false.
Two more questionable Pultizer Prizes, and the two that Mr. Baquet refers to were on a false story.
They got two Pulitzers for their false reporting. (and I am being very charitable here by leaving it as false)


Leftyg, you said, "* -> The Fake News is with Trump, and I choose to call it propaganda.
Lippmann and Merz noted critically: (referring to their investigation of the New York Times) -> " "The main censor and the main propagandist was the hope and fear in the minds of reporters and editors."
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 12th, 2020, 2:05 pm

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/opinion/trump-iran-media.html
"Trump Has Made Us All Stupid. The Decline of Discourse In The Anti-Trump Echo Chamber" by David Brooke

I didn't say it. This is his column, from the New York Times.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 14th, 2020, 12:09 pm

https://thehill.com/homenews/media/478025-harvard-professor-sues-nyt-over-epstein-donations-story
Harvard professor sues NYT over Epstein donations story
BY HARPER NEIDIG - 01/13/20 02:18 PM EST

Remember: "All the news that's fit to print."

A Harvard law professor is suing The New York Times, accusing the paper of publishing "false and defamatory" information and employing "clickbait" in an article about him.

Lawrence Lessig, the legal scholar and political activist, filed his lawsuit in the U.S. District Court for the District of Massachusetts on Monday.

"Defendants’ actions here are part of a growing journalistic culture of clickbaiting: the use of a shocking headline and/or lede to entice readers to click on a particular article, irrespective of the truth of the headline," he wrote in the lawsuit. "Defendants are fully aware that many, if not most, readers never read past the clickbait and that their takeaway concerning the target of the headline is limited to what they read in the headline."

He contends that the Times published false information about him in the headline and lede of an article about an essay he had written regarding Jeffrey Epstein's donations to MIT.

The headline on the story reads, "A Harvard Professor Doubles Down: If You Take Epstein’s Money, Do It in Secret," and the first line of the story is "it is hard to defend soliciting donations from the convicted sex offender Jeffrey Epstein. But Lawrence Lessig, a Harvard Law professor, has been trying."

The story, which includes an interview with Lessig, references an essay he wrote arguing that institutions like MIT are right to keep certain donations private.

But he argues that he was not making the case for taking money from people like Epstein, a convicted sex offender who was facing trial for sex trafficking when he was found dead in his jail cell last year. Lessig says that his point was that if an institution is going to take money from criminals or unsavory figures, then the donor should remain anonymous.

"My essay said—repeatedly—that such soliciting was a 'mistake,' " Lessig wrote in a blog post announcing the lawsuit on Monday. "And more importantly, it was a mistake because of the kind of harm it would trigger in both victims and women generally."

Lessig said in the lawsuit that he asked the Times to change the headline and lede of the story but the paper refused.
A spokesperson for the Times told The Hill that the paper will "defend against the claim vigorously."

"Senior editors reviewed the story after Professor Lessig complained and were satisfied that the story accurately reflected his statements," said the spokesperson in a statement. "We plan to defend against the claim vigorously."


Remember Cenk Uygar and the New York Times publishing Harry Reid saying Governor Romney did not pay taxes for ten years.
The paper went from the front page motto of "All the news that's fit to print" to "All the Slime from the Times" The New York Times has fallen in readership behind the Wall Street Journal and USA Today. Both Fox News and Rush Limbaugh average more listeners on a weekly basis than the New York Times average readership by sales.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 17th, 2020, 12:29 am

https://www.foxnews.com/media/msnbc-joe-scarborough-meghan-mccain-new-york-times
MSNBC's Joe Scarborough defends Meghan McCain, trashes NYT over 'embarrassing' op-ed
MSNBC star Joe Scarborough defended "The View" co-host Meghan McCain and slammed The New York Times over an "embarrassing" op-ed that declared that the ABC daytime show had a "Meghan McCain problem."...
While McCain received support from many on social media, her biggest defender was actually the "Morning Joe" co-host.

"What an embarrassing example of how the Left is becoming even more insular by the day. That is saying a lot," Scarborough began. "The Left owns most of American popular culture. And yet the existence of one moderately conservative woman poses a threat to civil discourse. Good Lord. What a joke."

Joe Scarborough

@JoeNBC
What an embarrassing example of how the Left is becoming even more insular by the day. That is saying a lot.

“Ms. McCain is the privileged product of conservative nepotism, capitalism and the American military-industrial complex.” https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/16/opin ... -ios-share … via @NYTOpinion

Meghan McCain on “The View.”
Opinion | ‘The View’ Has a Meghan McCain Problem
The daytime co-hosts’ heated bipartisan debates are played down as disagreement among friends. But the strain for “civility” is tiring.


Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the
Post by leftyg » December 30th, 2019, 11:52 pm
Remember this?
Crickets from Michaels. I guess he chooses not to defend his hero.

In this thread, Leftyg took issue with the NY Post column, made his opinion known about the NYT, asked for specifics for false statements in the NYT, and criticized other sources as propaganda.
As everyone can see, I responded by providing the evidence he wanted, and he has chosen not to comment about it. That is his choice.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 24th, 2020, 2:54 pm

https://townhall.com/columnists/michaelbarone/2020/01/24/historians-say-new-york-times-gets-history-wrong-n2560022
Historians Say New York Times Gets History Wrong
By Michael Barone

We live in history-making times. Not so much because of the impeachment trial going on in the Senate, which will make history only if it routinizes impeachments of impolite presidents when their opposition party gets control of the House, but because of what looks like an ongoing battle for control of the central narrative of American history.

That battle was opened back in August when The New York Times ran the first several articles of its 1619 Project. Named for the year when the first African slaves were offloaded in the dozen-year-old colony of Virginia, the central theme is that slavery and its effects are the central driving force in American history, the underpinning of everything from corporate capitalism to suburban sprawl.

The latest salvo on the other side comes from Princeton historian Sean Wilentz, writing in The Atlantic. Wilentz makes mincemeat of The 1619 Project lead Nikole Hannah-Jones' contention that protecting slavery was a main motive of the American Revolution, of her statement that Abraham Lincoln "opposed black equality" and of her avowal that blacks fought "alone" for equal rights after the Civil War.

Wilentz was also a co-signer of a letter to The Times lamenting factual errors in its articles, along with Brown University's Gordon Wood, Princeton's James McPherson and City University of New York's James Oakes. Wood is a premier historian of the American Revolution. "I don't know of any colonist who said that they wanted independence in order to preserve their slaves," he wrote in a separate letter to The Times' editor-in-chief, as reported by the World Socialist Web Site, which has taken an interest in the controversy. "No colonist expressed alarm that the mother country was out to abolish slavery in 1776."


CARTOONS | PAT CROSS
VIEW CARTOON
McPherson, the leading scholar of the Civil War, said he was "disturbed by what seemed like a very unbalanced, one-sided account, which lacked context and perspective on the complexity of slavery." Oakes, a leading historian of Reconstruction, calls the idea that "slavery or racism is built into the DNA of America" one of several "really dangerous tropes." He adds: "They're not only ahistorical, they're actually anti-historical. The function of those tropes is to deny change over time."

Which helps explain why The 1619 Project makes short shrift of black leaders and their white allies who led successful fights to make enormous change. "One of the many odd things about the New York Times's '1619 Project,' on slavery," notes Steven Hayward, author of the two-volume "The Age of Reagan," "is that Martin Luther King Jr is barely mentioned (ditto Frederick Douglass)." Nor is there mention of A. Philip Randolph, organizer of the 1963 March on Washington, or the 1920s Harlem Renaissance.

Wilentz, McPherson and Oakes aren't conservative polemicists; Wilentz is a strong partisan Democrat and supporter of the impeachment of President Donald Trump. Their point is that The 1619 Project is inaccurate in many important respects -- on certain facts and, even more so, in the overall lesson it seeks to teach, as The Times promotes its use in schools.

As Wilentz told The Atlantic's Adam Serwer, "To teach children that the American Revolution was fought in part to secure slavery would be giving a fundamental misunderstanding not only of what the American Revolution was all about but what America stood for and has stood for since the Founding." Anti-slavery ideology was a "very new thing in the world in the 18th century ... there was more anti-slavery activity in the colonies than in Britain."
Or, as McPherson explains, every human society has had slavery, and the British Atlantic seaboard colonies were one of the first societies to spawn an anti-slavery movement, with several voting to abolish slavery in the first years of the republic.

One peculiar thing about The Times' effort to seize control of the central narrative of American history is that it comes just a few years after American voters elected and reelected an African American president. Barack Obama was only the seventh president (and only the third Democrat, after Andrew Jackson and Franklin Roosevelt) to win a majority of the popular vote twice in the 188 years it had been the primary means of determining electoral votes.


The election of Donald Trump has been taken by many of his critics, not least of whom is The Times, as the election of a racist by a racist country -- an irremediably racist country, if you take the view promoted by The 1619 Project. Slavery determines everything and always will. Serious historians criticize The Times' inaccuracies because they know that sometimes things can change for the better, and have changed for the better. We should not forget.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » January 24th, 2020, 7:49 pm

Michaels, you have to understand that the sort of history the the 1619 project represents will always have its opponents and its proponents. The thesis that our history began in 1619 with slavery is debatable, but it is also a thesis worth explaring. You can intelligently come down on either side or ano any of the many sides that there are out there..

Also, Michaels, I would like to hear more from you and less from cut and pasted experts. leftyg
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 25th, 2020, 7:50 am

Unless I am reading a comic book, with the intention of escapism, I do not value hypothetical examinations after the fact. The 1619 project is a fantasy project that offers no constructive value. You seem to think that it is a topic worth exploring. Why?
Is it hard to believe, or harder to accept, that our country, founded as it was, has been a champion of freedom and liberty and that the history of our country has shown this?
Or is it easier to believe, or is it more desirable to believe, that our country is just another fraud, and not different than the fairy tales we were told as children?
A person's circumstances influences the outlook that one has about life but the past is not a determinant of our future unless you want it to be your excuse for anything and everything that goes wrong in your life. If you are looking for a scapegoat, you can always find one. That does not mean that the scapegoat is the cause of your problems, it is just a psychological crutch that is used to absolve a lack of resolve to overcome the circumstances.
I have only seen declarative statements from the 1619 project regarding their assertions. I have not seen evidence presented to suggest that our history is not what it was. And you have the noted historians, quoted from in the article that do not see any evidence to rebut our history either.
You do not see the harm that these endeavors cause because you were quick to accept and run with other msm themes. And you can argue this point, but you even participated in pushing and maintaining some of these false themes.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 25th, 2020, 10:36 am

Hey Leftyg,
Instead of the New York Times going back four hundred years in an effort to (?) - set the record straight? Why doesn't the New York Times just go back the last three years and "set the record straight" about their stories in the President Trump - Russian collusion election hoax? The question is nearly rhetorical isn't it. And the question explains not only what the Times has been doing regarding President Trump, but it also explains their present 1619 project.
The New York Times is more interested in politics and thematic agenda activism than in true ethics based journalism.
Why wont the New York Times use Toulmins method of argumentation and explain why their articles on President Trump did not have the negative effect of spreading false based hatred. Or, why don't you try to do it in defense of the New York Times?
If you could set up a thread and argue that Franz flames the Racist flames over Ferguson, you certainly should find it easy to argue that the New York Times spreads hatred of Donald Trump.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » January 26th, 2020, 3:15 pm

Michaels you wrote:

Unless I am reading a comic book, with the intention of escapism, I do not value hypothetical examinations after the fact. The 1619 project is a fantasy project that offers no constructive value. You seem to think that it is a topic worth exploring. Why?
The 1619 project is another way of looking at our history. That does not make it right or wrong. What we need are insights into what it means and gleaning things about out past from it. I know that a view of history that runs counter to your view is unsettling, and you should voice your disagreement. But, it works a lot better when you first confirm the others point of view as real, or existing because that is how they see it. I can easily see that the advent of slavery into our country (or the advent of African-Americans) is a pivotal point in our history. Trying to build historical theses and explanations from it seems reasonable.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » January 26th, 2020, 3:23 pm

Instead of the New York Times going back four hundred years in an effort to (?) - set the record straight? Why doesn't the New York Times just go back the last three years and "set the record straight" about their stories in the President Trump - Russian collusion election hoax? The question is nearly rhetorical isn't it. And the question explains not only what the Times has been doing regarding President Trump, but it also explains their present 1619 project.
The New York Times is more interested in politics and thematic agenda activism than in true ethics based journalism.
Why wont the New York Times use Toulmins method of argumentation and explain why their articles on President Trump did not have the negative effect of spreading false based hatred. Or, why don't you try to do it in defense of the New York Times?
If you could set up a thread and argue that Franz flames the Racist flames over Ferguson, you certainly should find it easy to argue that the New York Times spreads hatred of Donald Trump.
I do Bob Frantz because he is an individual model of a right wing demagogue, a small example.

Why don't we do this: why don't you specifically tell me where the Times lied about Trump. I will research your claim and refute it or accept it. We can hash over the individual cases one at a time, no snuck premises or begged questions where you assume answers because we do not often agree. That holds for me too. In other words just one thing.
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 27th, 2020, 11:26 am

Leftyg, I do not have a subscription to the New York Times and I wouldn't support them even for the purpose of this thread, I am not going to pay for one. I am also not going to pay for past articles by getting a subscription or pay per article. All I have are the excerpts of some of these articles quoted in different articles. That leaves you with several advantages as you can say whatever and I can not pull out the quote and examine the context.
In this thread, I posted what Dean Baquet is quoted to have said. Now follow that quote and critically examine it.
We built our newsroom to cover one story and we did it well, Baquet said.....We set ourselves up to cover that story....but the fact is, the conspiracy - coordination allegation the Times had devoted itself to pursuing,............TURNED OUT TO BE FALSE.

With the aid of hindsight, we can look back at every article that the times posted back then of Trump/Russia collusion knowing that it was false. Further we have the admission by Mr. Baquet who said that "they built (their) newsroom to cover ONE STORY, that story. In Mr. Baquet's own words: "The conspiracy coordination allegation THE TIMES HAD DEVOTED ITSELF TO PURSUING. One story that they devoted themselves to pursuing. One story, in which their motivation was to prove that the allegation was true. And that one story came complete with strategic leaks to them from Mr. Strozk, and anyone else that they could use to further that allegation. They published anything they thought agreed with the allegation that Mr. Trump did collude with Russia. And when they did not have anything, they published the opinions of others who were going along with this theme that they were motivated to pursue. (motivated to prove).
When they did not have Romney's tax filings, but they wanted to smear Romney, they published what Harry Reid said. And as we all know, Harry Reid lied about his allegations, and bragged about it. That didn't matter to the New York Times, as my previous posts have shown. Using Harry Reid and others as they have, the New York Times engaged in a form of prosecution by proxy. If they didn't have the evidence, or if they could not say something that they wanted to, they found someone, anyone, and used that person and quoted them. Remember Daria who reported on The Age of Innuendo?
We can try this, but like Nicholson said in A few Good Men. The truth, You can't handle the truth. You Leftyg like to pull out: "That you are entitled to your own opinion but not to your own facts.there are facts", That goes for you, and the New York Times that cherry pick just what you see that you think proves something (your facts) but does not really do so. You and the times did this the last couple of years.
When you and Juiced talked about all of President Trump's contacts with Russia, you were convinced that that proved he was guilty of something (You didn't know what and we all know now that there wasn't anything illegal about his contacts. You said that Nunes going to see President Trump was wrong, when it wasn't. And your still repeating old allegations that have already been proven wrong - emoluments violations.

But okay, let's try. Recently the New York Times revisited Ukraine and the phone call as part of their promotion of Bolton's newly published book.
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/26/us/politics/trump-bolton-book-ukraine.html
From Town Hall https://townhall.com/tipsheet/leahbarkoukis/2020/01/27/bolton-n2560152
The New York Times published a report about the excerpt that says the president tied $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine to officials helping investigate the Bidens.

As the townhall article shows, the transcript clearly shows that the President did not tie the security assistance to officials helping the Bidens.
Now according to Toulmin's method of argumentation, the transcript of the phone call would come under the area of a rebuttal acknowledging that there is another valid view of the phone call. It does not appear that the New York Times mentioned the transcript when you read the quote of the Times publishing their report. If that is true, then that is clear evidence that the Times was not interested in presenting all the facts, only their facts. Quoting what Mr. Bolton says is not proof nor evidence of what took place. It is only reporting what he said about the call.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby leftyg » January 27th, 2020, 12:59 pm

Michaels, the New York Times was right to do the article. First collusion is not a crime. Book one of the Mueller Report was about a "criminal conspiracy." Mueller and his team could not prove a conspiracy; that doe not mean that Trump's campaign did not conspire with Russians: it just could not be proved. I know it; the Times knows it; everybody but you seems to know it.

What would happen to our country if every report that did result in a conviction was termed a lie? That is crazy. The Times presented evidence, and evidently that was not enough to convince the Mueller team. The Times is not wrong all the time or even wrong on what it printed. Think of all the conservative outlets that would be shut down over their numerous lies about Hillary Clinton? Lets see just recently they went after Hillary for Benghazi, her emails and Uranium one and ll of them were completely discredited by the Justice Department https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2020/01 ... on-results

Should Breitbart and the lot of them be shutdown? What they did was far worse. But getting back to the Times, they strive to tell the truth. And again there were many suspicious interactions between the Trump campaign and the Russians and continued coziness; there just was not enough to charge a crime. AND remember that according to DOJ policy the president cannot be charged with a crime while he is in office. Mueller had to respect that guideline.

Also, Mueller objected to Bob Barr's blatant distortion of the Mueller Report. https://www.npr.org/2019/05/01/71892764 ... -in-letter.

Remember keep your response relevant. We are talking about lies, not your interpretation of a newspaper report.,
leftyg
 
Posts: 5494
Joined: February 10th, 2011, 7:40 pm

Re: NY Times should be investigated for being wrong all the

Postby Michaels153 » January 27th, 2020, 4:07 pm

Leftyg. You said you wanted to talk about one article at a time. I give you an article and you dont mention it.
My response was relevant The times lied when they said that President Trump tied the military aid to Ukraine officials working on the investigation.
And what interpretation? When you go to a store and buy something; you go to the check out counter where the items you want to buy are scanned, you then hand the cashier the money to pay for it, and then the cashier hands you the item and a receipt. Easy huh? you give the money, and they give you the product and a receipt. The times said " the president tied $391 million in security assistance to Ukraine to officials helping investigate the Bidens.
Now show me what the president got in return for the security assistance. What was that?, Speak up Leftyg its hard to understand you when your grumbling....Why yes, that is right, the President got nothing in exchange for the $391 million. Yet the Times said that money was tied to Ukraine officials helping investigate the Bidens. Ooops! The Times lied.
The Liberal Creed: Take all the money you can, from all the people you can, in all the ways that you can, for as long as you can.
Michaels153
 
Posts: 2641
Joined: February 9th, 2011, 3:25 pm


Return to Politics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest