The front page of the New York Times. 5 days before the election.
Meh, I’m still on the fence. Let’s give him a third term to really figure this out, guys.
If they wanted the statement to be taken seriously, they shouldn’t have put it in the Opinion section.
That’s what it is though? You can’t put opinions in news. Even if your opinion is correct.
That was not an opinion. He said all those things. That full-page headline is only facts.
“This thing happened” is news, so “Trump said this” is news.
“You should have this reaction to it” is for the opinion pages, even if that reaction is “you should believe him”.
That isn’t to say the Times doesn’t try to get away with pushing a narrative while technically following the rules, but that rule is still a good one.
It is also rephrasing what he said, not using his direct words. There is opinion involved in such things.
My friend, lemme tell u something about this “news.”
You can’t put opinions in news.
Sure you can. These journals do it all the time by filtering it through a cushy interview or ghostwritten native ad or “unnamed source”.
You can’t put opinions in news.
Lol are you new to US media?
Fox would like a word…
I pointed this out elsewhere recently. The lawyers of FOX News, when trying to defend the agency in Dominion Voting Systems v. Fox News Network made it super clear that FOX News is an entertainment channel and is not supposed to be regarded as news (now called the Tucker Carlson Defense) that no reasonable person would interpret the content of the shows on FOX as actual news.
FNC’s business model depends on the notion that it’s main viewership are not reasonable people.
You can! In the “opinion” section! It’s right there on the first page, actually, right next to the naked lady and perfume ads.
If he said it is not an opinion but a fact. So, news.
Also shouldn’t have repeatedly supported a genocide the prior years
deleted by creator
Mainstream media was a day late and a dollar short in understanding the threat of fascism. Par for the course for liberal media.
Google: trump fascism before:2016-01-01
Why you should stop calling Donald Trump a fascist. December 4, 2015
Donald Trump Isn’t a Fascist; He’s a Media-Savvy Know-Nothing. December 28, 2015
Whose Fascism Is This, Anyway? Dec. 15, 2015
https://www.nytimes.com/2015/12/16/opinion/whose-fascism-is-this-anyway.html
Is Donald Trump leading a proto-fascist movement? August 28, 2015
https://theweek.com/articles/574097/donald-trump-leading-protofascist-movement
Trump May Be a Loudmouthed Demagogue, but Is He a Fascist? Donald Trump’s anti-Muslim rhetoric has his opponents likening him to Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler. Such comparisons may be misplaced.
https://foreignpolicy.com/2015/12/09/trump-may-be-a-loudmouthed-demagogue-but-is-he-a-fascist/
Is Donald Trump a Fascist?
I’m assuming you meant “liberal” ironically? Those outlets are exactly as liberal as the right-wing conservative corporations that own them.
American liberals are right wing conservative corpos.
I suspect the person you’re replying to is using “liberal” in a way that refers to someone to the right of their own position. Not in the way Limbaugh used it as a catch-all for anyone left of Reagan.
Likely. I get why people find the modern American use of “liberal” as a synonym for the progressive left annoying, but word usages change and that one has unfortunately stuck, which makes references to the “liberal media” confusing.
the modern American use of “liberal” as a synonym for the progressive left… but word usages change
Modern American civics education is, on average, basically non-existent. All changes in word usage trends toward less nuance, greater redundancy, and greater ambiguity.
And that’s fine, I guess, because Descriptivism or whatever. But in the event that moderately educated people use the terms “Liberal” or “Leftist”, it’s probably okay to assume the formal meanings.
makes references to the “liberal media” confusing."
You seem to not be that confused, since you correctly pointed out that these companies are owned by conservatives.
I’m well-educated and understand the historic use of “liberal” versus today’s common usage in the United States. My only real concern is that people who are only familiar with U.S. common usage might need some explanation.
Welcome to Lemmy.
word usages change
Maybe it changed in your country but that doesn’t affect the meaning it has in my country. We may use the English language to communicate, but we’re not reproducing all of american culture, and we don’t bring over all of their changes. Yes, it’s confusing for you. For us too. No, don’t expect the rest of the world to adopt all the changes you make.
I find any use of the same word to mean opposite things confusing, and it seems to happen more often than I would like in the US politics
I hope this comment cleaves your brain.
I think they meant it literally
deleted by creator
The only time Donald Trump tells the truth is when he says he’s going to do something terrible
Which is always.
He was just joking. He didn’t mean it. Are you tired of winning yet? We’ve beaten Iran like 886 times in 6 months.
Oh The New York Times can go fuck itself. Coward bitches all but abdicate their journalist duty and think they deserve some kind of credit?
Eat shit NYT
The front page of the New York Times.
Okay, but also…
Leaked NYT Gaza Memo Tells Journalists to Avoid Words “Genocide,” “Ethnic Cleansing,” and “Occupied Territory”. This, while regularly blaming poor electoral performance among liberal politicians on the Palestinian solidarity movement.
and further…
The New York Times rarely quotes transgender people in trans stories in a journal that simply will not shut up about how we need to debate Transgender athletes competing in sports.
then, it cannot be overstated how many times we get…
Why does the New York Times keep calling the left ‘divisive’? With popular candidates and policies routinely pillared as antithetical to the mainstream Democratic Party and a threat to general election success. At the same time, NeverTrump Republicans who run the gamut from Donald Trump’s secretary’s husband to Ted Cruz’s former campaign manager keep getting Op-Eds and interviews explaining why the party needs to move to the right in order to win voters.
The NYT fucking sucks. It consistently tries to have its NeverTrump cake while eating out on Trump-friendly business interests. It is a paper of, by, and for the millionaire class, whose only real criticisms of the President begin and end with how it makes America look to the rest of the world. Stop buying into 96-pt font when as often as not the NYT agenda is buried in the fine print.
Leaked NYT Gaza Memo Tells Journalists to Avoid Words “Genocide,” “Ethnic Cleansing,” and “Occupied Territory"
The news section actually DOES use those words.
They regularly use these words as a quote.
For instance:
"Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International both accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing and genocide, charges that the Israeli government denies"
They just don’t throw inflammatory statements. This is the news section of a major newspaper. It’s not a leftist blog.
Why does the New York Times keep calling the left ‘divisive’?
Most of the time, this was a quote:
They quoted David Crowley and college professor Erik Bleich.
Regading Howard Zinn, he was indeed divisive.
I don’t see anything wrong with that title. Conservative politicians have occasionally proposed or pushed to ban Zinn’s book. Some liberal historians also criticized his book.
https://newrepublic.com/article/213778/howard-zinn-biography-simple-story-american-history
Don’t get me wrong. I actually like the guy. But he was indeed divisive.
I think it’s crazy to allow people to have guns. But it’s fair to say gun laws are a divisive issue in the United States. The word “divisive” isn’t inherently bad. It’s a description.
The Times has been far too distracted as of late by worries over President Joe Biden’s age, allowing it to steal attention away from the larger and far more serious danger posed by a second Trump administration
Biden’s age was indeed a major concern. If they didn’t cover it, they would have been accused of a cover up.
Their coverage of Trump was extremely good and extensive:
Americans voted for him. That’s their choice.
The NYT is just as much to blame as the Washington Post, etc. They have all played major roles in sane-washing the literal fascism that is now strangling our nation. Fuck em.
This is the news section of a major newspaper. It’s not a leftist blog.
Which is funny, given that the bloggers - left, right, and center - have consistently been breaking more stories with better researched articles of late. The last straggling remnants of print journalism don’t have the budget to do more than stenography or the clout to do more than lick the taint of whomever is in charge.
Biden’s age was indeed a major concern.
If you treat MAGA Fascism and Biden’s Octogenarianism as equally important, so will your audience.
Their coverage of Trump was extremely good and extensive
It was extremely late and ineffectual.
Meanwhile, for every Trump scandal story, we got three different Transgender Athlete pieces. North of 30 distinct pieces appeared, often at the front page of the Times coverage. These ran in lockstep with the Republican political campaign ads vilifying liberal candidates for support of Title XI and Equal Access laws.
This, alongside a slew of stories demonizing student protesters which went so far as to call them unwitting agents of the Iranian military.
So, after echoing a slew of lies that echoed Republican talking points in a razor thin election all year long, they also popped off a handful of stories critical of the Republican nominee weeks into the early voting period. Cool. Great job.
Americans voted for him. That’s their choice.
Millions of Americans were disenfranchised in 2024.
This was a failure of democracy regardless of outcome. But the dogged assertion that “Americans Voted For This” consistently ignores how many Americans were strictly prohibited from participating, to the point of facing years of jail time, if they even dared submit a provisional ballot.
This was published on October, 27 2024
The election was on November 5, 2024.It was printed nine days before.
Also, it was the cover of the Opinion section, not the whole paper.
https://www.yahoo.com/news/articles/chilling-nyt-cover-goes-viral-214330000.html
Good man.
As in hu-man.
Edit: ok so apparently we hate humans because men are also human
#ivotedforthis
actually...
I totally voted against this, having experienced Trump’s first term; having believed him when he said what he planned on doing on the stump; having become very familiar with Project 2025 Mandate For Leadership. It frustrates me that so many people didn’t, and voted based on racism and vibes.
We are very lucky they are so fucking stupid.
They kinda aren’t though? In many ways they are but they had a whole plan with Project 2025 and they actually went through with a good chunk of it.
I think it is dangerous that people keep referring to them as stupid. They are in many ways, but they are primarily evil.
We really are. Schmuck & Jeffries can’t sell us out to the Sociopathic Oligarchs and Israel fast enough, and we’d be totally screwed if MAGA wasn’t so virtuosically incompetent.
And yet, what, half of P2025 has been enacted?
Who are “you” and who are “they”?
Huh. He did exactly that…
Perhaps the least prophetic thing ever printed.
Yeah, whatever; go do one Donnie Duck
So tired of these Trump posts. Even with filters on, cannot escape this. Just disappear US. Irrecuperable messed up country.
What’s happens to us will affect everything unfortunately
No, you’re suffering from major 'Murica brain to think that everything everywhere will change depending on what happens in the US. The vast majority of the world will continue like normal, the daily lives of 95% of people won’t be affected in any noticeable way.
Yes because the last time their economy got screwed up in 2008, nothing happened in the rest of the world…
The entire world is interconnected through trade among other things. The US disappearing suddenly will fuck everything up, not as bad as China disappearing suddenly but still pretty bad
That’s weirdly the only good thing about it all: The EU finally learning that we need to disengage from the US. That’s something that will take decades and next time the US has a “good” leadership for a few years people will shout for more integration, but slooowly it sinks in that the US is NOT a partner and is NOT reliable and will forever be caught oscillating between center and far right in that two party system.
keep believing that.
you can easily view only posts in your local instance.
But but Harris?!?1. TeH jEnOsiDeE!!1! She hates teh ghey!
Blurghdurf didn’tearnmyvote hashtag jenosieeide
Yeah its unfortunate the harris decided to run as a republican instead of listening to her actual base.
