New York Times deputy editorial page editor James Dao said in an interview with his paper that a tweet accompanying the newest allegation against Supreme Court justice Brett Kavanaugh — characterizing sexual assault as “harmless fun” — “fell well below our standards.”
… “fell well below our standards.”
Really, Mr. Dao? Because, to me, it seems to fall perfectly within your current standards.
They don’t publish “All The News That’s Fit To Print” without first checking with Republicans to see if any article meets their muster…
“Why, there wasn’t even an antisemitic or racist dogwhistle in the whole tweet. We’re re-educating our folks on what we expect.”
Did not know that NYT had any standards left to worry about.
From the AP Stylebook …
**
**
These words may in some contexts give the erroneous connotation of wrongdoing.
People who say they are recovering from alcoholism, for example, are not admitting it. Said is usually sufficient.
NYT handling of this seems too incompetent to not be purposeful. It feels like someone wanted to botch the rollout.
Looks like Lindsey Graham officially took over the moniker of “They Grey Lady”.
The “Old Grey Lady” ain’t what she used to be!
Who else waits to see the latest dreck from Maureen Dowd when she takes another one of her endless whacks at Hillary?
I guess Mr. Dao’s organization is filled with Yale graduates. Yale seems to attract privileged assholes who think sexual assault at Friday and Saturday night drunken reveries is harmless fun. They all like beer.
Trivializing sexual assault may seem like harmless fun, but when readers rightfully became upset about it, The New York Times says, it confirmed that the once respected publication didn’t belong on Twitter in the first place.
It doesn’t.
I used to hate-read Dowd, but it’s just not worth it.
NYT urges unity after screwing up, again, and handing a big gift to trump.
As many are noting, this sort of “mistake” is now a regular occurrence at the NYT. The culture there needs changing. But the well-connected “access journalists” there won’t like that and one wonders if it starts at the top. Until someone higher up has an epiphany, I doubt their cautious kowtowing to white, male conservative power and unconscious validation of the status quo continues.
Where’s that picture of the guy shooting himself in the foot?
The NY TImes banks on liberal/progressive repulsion of the Human E. coli virus to keep subscription growth, because no one wants to belong to that Venn Diagram where growing disenchantment with that rag and the Scumbag’s dislike could ever exist in the same universe.
It’s more than a question of “The Times sucks!” This paper has never accounted for its wild support of our Iraqi Expedition, has spent the last three decades in a jihad against anyone named “Clinton”, got rid of its public editor and can’t hide its adoration of the barnyard exhibits that pass as conservative “intellectuals.” But like I said, they bank on your loathing of the Thing and their refined martyr routine to keep you subscribed.
Drop your subscription, enough to make them pause. (But you probably won’t because you like Paul Krugman, as if he’s the problem here.)
There is a difference between a lapse in taste, and a lapse in judgement.
What struck me about the interview on O’Donnell last night was that the Times editors didn’t seem to care about what Kavanaugh had done, or about the victims themselves.
The Times was focussed entirely on the fact that the FBI had failed to investigation all the allegations properly. The “new allegation” was relevant to them only insofar as it reinforced the narrative of FBI perfidy.
They didn’t think the allegation itself was a big deal – in large part because the victim was unwilling to talk, and has told friends she “didn’t remember”. And because they didn’t take it seriously, they screwed up that aspect of the story.
(and lets not even get into the headline – that made it seem like it was about white privilege at Yale (i.e a “water is wet” story), or the placement of the story itself (in the opinion section, apparently.) The first mistake was that the Times tried to bury the story – that resulted in editorial carelessness.
So at what point would he like us to believe anything the NYT prints anymore? Their credibility is now officially shot. Something this important, this critical, had no business being a joke.
Way to go. You just gave Trump and his minions every reason to call you fake news. Because you did this.