When asked why the Times doesn’t see its job as trying to “stop Trump,”
This, to me, is a little misleading. The Washington Post didn’t publish about Watergate to “stop Nixon.” They were, in fact, trying to provide impartial information – which in this case led them to present to their readers in stark terms why Nixon was a dangerous crook. But it wasn’t based in any desire to get Nixon specifically as far as I know.
Kahn … said journalism’s role is to provide “impartial information” rather than becoming a “propaganda arm.”
An excellent point. So you’re planning to fire the propagandists working for you and starting to provide impartial information, right?
…
Right?
It’s our job to cover the full range of issues that people have," he told Smith. "At the moment, democracy is one of them. But it’s not the top one — immigration happens to be the top [of polls], and the economy and inflation is the second. Should we stop covering those things because they’re favorable to Trump and minimize them?
Those issues are not in any way favorable to Trump, unless you spin it in his favor.
Yeah. Their editorial stance is fucking baffling to me.
Fun fact, I like journalism so I periodically subscribe to a random selection of online news outlets for the tiny little bit of cash that it costs to do it. I just cancelled the NY Times and explained in some detail that this bullshit is why.
It’s not. The system that cannot, or will not prevent him from constantly threatening democracy is our top concern. The system will persist long after trump has perished, and most aspiring tyrants aren’t as inept as trump.
Truth, but the NY Times is part of that system.
Yeah who cares about a fascist dictator takeover by a literal man-child when we have people not using the correct bathrooms!
Gotta solve the important stuff first.
An opinion piece trying to twist the man’s words.
The Times published a list of Trump’s first 10,000 lies in office.
That was The Washington Post
And the quote you’re saying is being twisted out of context is:
It’s our job to cover the full range of issues that people have. At the moment, democracy is one of them. But it’s not the top one — immigration happens to be the top [of polls], and the economy and inflation is the second. Should we stop covering those things because they’re favorable to Trump and minimize them?
That, to me, is way worse than what the headline says.
Also, I had somehow forgotten this – they have a new head editor as of 2022. I think that’s when it all went to shit. I don’t know much about the guy, but his Wikipedia entry is pretty bizarre:
“Kahn is of Lithuanian Jewish descent and the eldest child of Dorothy Davidson and Leo Kahn (1916–2011), founder of the Purity Supreme supermarket chain in New England and co-founder of the global office supply chain Staples. Leo had been awarded a journalism degree from Columbia University, after which he briefly had worked as a reporter, prompting a continuing interest in journalism that was reflected in his frequent dissection of newspaper coverage with his son.”
An opinion piece trying to twist the man’s words.
What’s the twist?
