• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Leaked Audio: NY Times shifts targeting of Trump from Russia collusion to racism

nekrodev said:
I mean, the Russia thing is pretty much done now. If nothing gets done after the Mueller report and his testimony, nothing will get done. No point in keeping on about it.
Click to expand...

Hmm... if it is no longer a demorat talking point does that make alleged facts no longer worth reporting? That is the problem with "all the news that's fit to print" - first the NTY decides what news is fit to print (what the current demorat talking points are) and then they create news stories to back them up, of course, omitting mention of anything running counter to them.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Everyone knew from the way the NYT reports they are 100% anti-president Trump.
The paper for the resist crowd. This just verifies that thinking. The Gray lady is
now officially dead...... It's a propaganda paper for the democrats and the resist movement.


Here’s the key passage from the transcript (emphasis added):

Dean Baquet: If we’re really going to be a transparent newsroom that debates these issues among ourselves and not on Twitter, I figured I should talk to the whole newsroom, and hear from the whole newsroom. We had a couple of significant missteps, and I know you’re concerned about them, and I am, too. But there’s something larger at play here. This is a really hard story, newsrooms haven’t confronted one like this since the 1960s. It got trickier after [inaudible] … went from being a story about whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia and obstruction of justice to being a more head-on story about the president’s character. We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well. Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story. I’d love your help with that. As Audra Burch said when I talked to her this weekend, this one is a story about what it means to be an American in 2019. It is a story that requires deep investigation into people who peddle hatred, but it is also a story that requires imaginative use of all our muscles to write about race and class in a deeper way than we have in years. In the coming weeks, we’ll be assigning some new people to politics who can offer different ways of looking at the world. We’ll also ask reporters to write more deeply about the country, race, and other divisions. I really want your help in navigating this story.


This is a smoking gun. It shows the most powerful news organization in the country congratulating itself for setting the anti-Trump narrative on Russia collusion, and seamlessly transitioning to setting a narrative of Trump as racist after collusion flopped.

There is a collusion case to be made, but it’s not about Trump and Russia. It’s about powerful news organizations throwing their weight behind Democrats.

Read the full article at the link.
Click to expand...
What a load of bull****. Everyone knows that The NY Times doesn’t like Trump, same as virtually every other news organization, but there’s nothing in the “smoking gun” article that you’ve posted that demonstrates negative bias of Trump. On the contrary, Baquet repeatedly talks about fairness, and transparency, even at the expense of pissing off readers who only want to see anti-Trump reporting.

You’re gonna have to do way better than this crap to prove any “collusion”.
 
Praxas said:
Just so we know since you linked this AS FACT. YOU, Common Sense 1,have now admitted to the bolded as FACT that the NY Times is THE MOST POWERFUL NEWS ORIGINATION IN THE COUNTRY right?

We now have Common Sense 1 admitting that the NY Times is THE MOST POWERFUL NEWS ORIGINATION IN THE COUNTRY above anything else. Remember that folks for any time you want to.
Click to expand...

What is your point ?? Why do you think someone saying the NYT's is the most powerful is significant ??
 
Praxas said:
Just so we know since you linked this AS FACT. YOU, Common Sense 1,have now admitted to the bolded as FACT that the NY Times is THE MOST POWERFUL NEWS ORIGINATION IN THE COUNTRY right?

We now have Common Sense 1 admitting that the NY Times is THE MOST POWERFUL NEWS ORIGINATION IN THE COUNTRY above anything else. Remember that folks for any time you want to.
Click to expand...
There is no doubt that powerful forces are at work to secretly undermine Trump and constitutional freedoms in America.
 
OK...so if NYT is shifting their focus, can anyone show that they made any news up? I mean, so what if they are shifting their focus, as long as the stories are not "fake", what is the big deal?
 
RaleBulgarian said:
What a load of bull****. Everyone knows that The NY Times doesn’t like Trump, same as virtually every other news organization, but there’s nothing in the “smoking gun” article that you’ve posted that demonstrates negative bias of Trump. On the contrary, Baquet repeatedly talks about fairness, and transparency, even at the expense of pissing off readers who only want to see anti-Trump reporting.

You’re gonna have to do way better than this crap to prove any “collusion”.
Click to expand...

The objection is that the NY TIMES has a specific agenda -- looking for news as opposed to simply reporting on it.
Which is ok. The problem is that they still insist on being considered a mainstream, unbiased, news organization.
 
Airyaman said:
OK...so if NYT is shifting their focus, can anyone show that they made any news up? I mean, so what if they are shifting their focus, as long as the stories are not "fake", what is the big deal?
Click to expand...

The issue would be is that they are otherwise presenting themselves as unbiased reporters of facts. When it seems they are going out on a particular objective.
 
Praxas said:
Just so we know since you linked this AS FACT. YOU, Common Sense 1,have now admitted to the bolded as FACT that the NY Times is THE MOST POWERFUL NEWS ORIGINATION IN THE COUNTRY right?

We now have Common Sense 1 admitting that the NY Times is THE MOST POWERFUL NEWS ORIGINATION IN THE COUNTRY above anything else. Remember that folks for any time you want to.
Click to expand...

Silly, silly post! Trying to spin what the thread is about..... What you need to remember is this!
NYT is a biased/partisan propaganda rag now in the era of Trump!
From the article:
This is a smoking gun. It shows the most powerful news organization in the country congratulating itself for setting the anti-trump narrative on russia collusion, and seamlessly transitioning to setting a narrative of trump as racist after collusion flopped.

There is a collusion case to be made, but it’s not about trump and russia. It’s about powerful news organizations throwing their weight behind democrats.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The objection is that the NY TIMES has a specific agenda -- looking for news as opposed to simply reporting on it.
Which is ok. The problem is that they still insist on being considered a mainstream, unbiased, news organization.
Click to expand...
Increasing division in America is a valid and major current issue worthy of reporting.

Have you read the full transcript? I have. Over and over, transparency and truth/facts are emphasized. There isn’t anything to suggest a hit job on Trump.
 
The media colluding with the rat party to promote a message? Say it aint so!!!



Politicians AND media regurgitating the same talking points????

Unheard of!

The tragic is not that the media and rat party are so corrupt...but that they know the idiots that support them will just blindly go along with it.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Silly, silly post! Trying to spin what the thread is about..... What you need to remember is this!
NYT is a biased/partisan propaganda rag now in the era of Trump!
From the article:
This is a smoking gun. It shows the most powerful news organization in the country congratulating itself for setting the anti-trump narrative on russia collusion, and seamlessly transitioning to setting a narrative of trump as racist after collusion flopped.
Click to expand...
An editorial comment isn’t fact, it is opinion, and in this case, a warped opinion.

Cut/paste any part/s that you think are “the smoking gun” and I’ll cut/paste the parts where truth/fact and transparency are stressed by Baquet.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Increasing division in America is a valid and major current issue worthy of reporting.

Have you read the full transcript? I have. Over and over, transparency and truth/facts are emphasized. There isn’t anything to suggest a hit job on Trump.
Click to expand...

Oh, baloney! The opiate crisis is worth reporting. Gang and inner-city violence is worth reporting. The great economy is worth reporting. Some ginned-up political screed about "racism in America" is nothing more than a cynical ploy for Democrats to win in 2020.
This masturbatory exercise which the NYT is performing is nothing more than convincing themselves they are on the side of the angels, when we ALL know their motivation is purely political and anything but objective.
 
Former NYT editor calls out paper of record for ‘anti-Trump’ bias in new book

Former NYT editor calls out paper of record for ‘anti-Trump’ bias in new book – DocumentTruth.com

Former New York Times editor Jill Abramson has reportedly slammed the newspaper’s biased coverage of US President Donald Trump in an upcoming book, saying that it is “unmistakably anti-Trump.”

Abramson, who edited the Times from 2011 to 2014, writes in the book titled ‘Merchants of Truth’, that the editors have a business incentive to criticize Trump as much as possible because of its mostly liberal readership.

“Given its mostly liberal audience, there was an implicit financial reward for the Times in running lots of Trump stories, almost all of them negative: they drove big traffic numbers,” writes the veteran journalist, who was also the paper’s first female editor.

Abramson said in the excerpts, which were first published by Fox News, that despite the fact that some people cancelled their subscriptions to the paper after the 2016 presidential election, the anti-Trump coverage ultimately “inflated subscription orders to levels no one anticipated.”

Abramson also takes a dig at younger “woke” members of the Times staff who believed that “urgent times called for urgent measures” and that the “dangers of Trump’s presidency obviated the old standards” of journalism.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
An editorial comment isn’t fact, it is opinion, and in this case, a warped opinion.

Cut/paste any part/s that you think are “the smoking gun” and I’ll cut/paste the parts where truth/fact and transparency are stressed by Baquet.
Click to expand...

Sorry you are incorrect again! see post #38 please The gray lady is dead....... It's Trump hate driven!
They don't "report" the news. They have a side in the news... Anti-Trump! And that is a fact.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Increasing division in America is a valid and major current issue worthy of reporting.

Have you read the full transcript? I have. Over and over, transparency and truth/facts are emphasized. There isn’t anything to suggest a hit job on Trump.
Click to expand...

Yes, it is "A" story worth reporting on.
But that isn't what he is saying. He's saying that he wants ALL stories through that prism.
 
Just about the time the term “racism” has lost all meaning the NYT adopts it as a partisan strategy. Another winner for sure.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Everyone knew from the way the NYT reports they are 100% anti-president Trump.
The paper for the resist crowd. This just verifies that thinking. The Gray lady is
now officially dead...... It's a propaganda paper for the democrats and the resist movement.


Leaked Audio: NY Times shifts targeting of Trump from Russia collusion to racism

Leaked Audio: NY Times shifts targeting of Trump from Russia collusion to racism

Executive Editor Dean Baquest: “We built our newsroom to cover one story [Russia collusion], and we did it truly well. Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story [Trump’s racism].”

In an astounding audio transcript leaked to Slate, NY Times executive editor Dean Baquet reveals what we all knew: The NY Times is out to get Trump. It’s deliberate, it’s planned, and it’s shifting after Russia collusion failed to portraying Trump as racist.


Here’s the key passage from the transcript (emphasis added):

Dean Baquet: If we’re really going to be a transparent newsroom that debates these issues among ourselves and not on Twitter, I figured I should talk to the whole newsroom, and hear from the whole newsroom. We had a couple of significant missteps, and I know you’re concerned about them, and I am, too. But there’s something larger at play here. This is a really hard story, newsrooms haven’t confronted one like this since the 1960s. It got trickier after [inaudible] … went from being a story about whether the Trump campaign had colluded with Russia and obstruction of justice to being a more head-on story about the president’s character. We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well. Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story. I’d love your help with that. As Audra Burch said when I talked to her this weekend, this one is a story about what it means to be an American in 2019. It is a story that requires deep investigation into people who peddle hatred, but it is also a story that requires imaginative use of all our muscles to write about race and class in a deeper way than we have in years. In the coming weeks, we’ll be assigning some new people to politics who can offer different ways of looking at the world. We’ll also ask reporters to write more deeply about the country, race, and other divisions. I really want your help in navigating this story.


This is a smoking gun. It shows the most powerful news organization in the country congratulating itself for setting the anti-Trump narrative on Russia collusion, and seamlessly transitioning to setting a narrative of Trump as racist after collusion flopped.

There is a collusion case to be made, but it’s not about Trump and Russia. It’s about powerful news organizations throwing their weight behind Democrats.

Read the full article at the link.
Click to expand...

When one bogus smear campaign fails, you move on to the next one. Rather unsurprising, really.
 
Acadia said:
Oh, baloney! The opiate crisis is worth reporting. Gang and inner-city violence is worth reporting. The great economy is worth reporting. Some ginned-up political screed about "racism in America" is nothing more than a cynical ploy for Democrats to win in 2020.
This masturbatory exercise which the NYT is performing is nothing more than convincing themselves they are on the side of the angels, when we ALL know their motivation is purely political and anything but objective.
Click to expand...
The only baloney being peddled here is yours and others claims of a plot against Trump.

The opioid crisis, gang violence, and the economy are being reported. Don’t believe it? Google any of those and you’ll be rewarded with a plethora of reports.

You don’t see the increased incidents of racial violence and division in America because you’re wearing orange blinders.
 
Common Sense 1 said:
Sorry you are incorrect again! see post #38 please The gray lady is dead....... It's Trump hate driven!
They don't "report" the news. They have a side in the news... Anti-Trump! And that is a fact.
Click to expand...
An opinion written by someone who hasn’t worked at The Times for several years is just that, an opinion. Still, it is obvious that The Times and other news organizations have profited from reporting Trump’s many **** ups and they can’t be faulted for telling the truth.
 
Athanasius68 said:
Yes, it is "A" story worth reporting on.
But that isn't what he is saying. He's saying that he wants ALL stories through that prism.
Click to expand...
Really? Show where Baquet says/implied that.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Increasing division in America is a valid and major current issue worthy of reporting.
Click to expand...
If it's such a major issue, where was the NYT War Room when Obama was increasing division in America?
 
Taylor said:
If it's such a major issue, where was the NYT War Room when Obama was increasing division in America?
Click to expand...
Whataboutisms aren’t a valid argument. They are distractions away from a subject that the speaker doesn’t want to address.
 
RaleBulgarian said:
Increasing division in America is a valid and major current issue worthy of reporting.

Have you read the full transcript? I have. Over and over, transparency and truth/facts are emphasized. There isn’t anything to suggest a hit job on Trump.
Click to expand...

You meant "worthy of stoking". Right? I don't wanna put words in your mouth or anything, but I feel compelled to point out you hit some wrong keys there. Just trying to help.
 
humbolt said:
You meant "worthy of stoking". Right? I don't wanna put words in your mouth or anything, but I feel compelled to point out you hit some wrong keys there. Just trying to help.
Click to expand...
Nope, but thanks for trying.
 
Athanasius68 said:
The issue would be is that they are otherwise presenting themselves as unbiased reporters of facts. When it seems they are going out on a particular objective.
Click to expand...

If they are still reporting facts, then where is the bias?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom