Author Topic: The End of the NYT  (Read 12719 times)

James J Eivan

  • Guest
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #45 on: June 08, 2020, 08:15:17 PM »
An article in Vox by Zach Beauchamp  finds flaws in the Weiss twittering. (My emphasis added)

"...Rather, itís a question of how journalists should think about their roles as guardians of mainstream discourse.


And you're worried about the "authoritarian" in the White House?
It's more of Rev Austin agreeing with the NYC Times action   ... Disagreeing with the President ... and being appalled that the whole world doesn't see it his way.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13579
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #46 on: June 08, 2020, 08:57:51 PM »
Some ironies abound.
There are folks here who wanted an article in Lutheran Forum retracted and some cancelled their subscriptions.
There are folks here who would legislate matters of sexuality and reproduction, even if those matters conflicted with the religious convictions of others.
There are those here continually pronouncing judgement on "liberal culture" or "the world today" or "Democrats" or a bunch of other societal constructs, maybe journalism, maybe academia, maybe our public schools.
There are folks here eager to legislate their "ways" of living, doing business, running schools, getting married or having children.
And this humble correspondent is supposed to be knee-shaky, heart-quivery worried about "progressives" becoming authoritarian?
The New York Times tells me what is going on and I am quite free to make up my own mind as to what to think about it. You are too, but it seems you fear the brain-washing, overpowering, mind-controlling power of the "mainstream media" that has now tethered the minds of the populace and is leading them to a progressive perdition.
I have learned to set aside my initial fear that everyone actually believes every bit of horse-poop dropped from the mouth of Rush Limbaugh et al.
If the editorial pages of The New York Time were so powerful, wouldn't Democrats be in control right now?
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Back home from Sioux City after three days and a pleasant reunion of the East High School class of - can you believe it! - 1959.

Pastor Ken Kimball

  • ALPB Forum Regular
  • ****
  • Posts: 279
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #47 on: June 08, 2020, 10:06:49 PM »
Actually it seems that in most of the cities with troubled police departments and where protests have been accompanied or followed by rioting, that Democrats are in control.  Minneapolis, New York, LA, Chicago, Baltimore,  etc.  How's that working out?   And now a new experiment is proposed in those places with the defunding/disbanding of police departments. 

pastorg1@aol.com

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 1041
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #48 on: June 09, 2020, 12:13:55 AM »
Easy-peesy way to check out the dismantlement of PDs:

The local PD announces which neighborhood will have no police coverage that night. To be fair, start with the wealthier parts of town. Pick another neighborhood the following night and keep going until the vigilantes arrive.

Peter (Robespierre was an aristocrat) Garrison
Pete Garrison, STS

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13579
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #49 on: June 09, 2020, 12:20:06 AM »
Let us not be intentionally stupid. The discussion about changes in the police force does not mean abolishing law enforcement. It does not mean there would be no police.
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Back home from Sioux City after three days and a pleasant reunion of the East High School class of - can you believe it! - 1959.

J. Thomas Shelley

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 4000
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #50 on: June 09, 2020, 12:44:31 AM »
Let us not be intentionally stupid. The discussion about changes in the police force does not mean abolishing law enforcement. It does not mean there would be no police.

Exactly.

In many States that would mean the County Sheriff's Department taking over.  Sheriffs are elected on four year terms and much of their staff is subject to at-will employment with possible termination every fourth year, depending on the winds of political fortune.

In some States that would mean that the State Police/State Patrol would take over.  With only the top command subject to political appointment enforcement is likely to be more apolitical or heavy-handed...take your pick. 

In some of those States having the SP take over would mean no more enforcement of local ordinances.  No big deal, until your neighbor's tethered dog howls all through the night and the only enforcement option would be a LOCAL noise control or animal control ordinance. 

And, by the way, local parking ordinances typically carry fines of <$50.00.   State level vehicle code parking fines (with costs) can easily exceed $100.00.

You get what you pay for.
Greek Orthodox-Ecumenical Patriarchate

Baptized, Confirmed, and Ordained United Methodist.
Served as a Lutheran Pastor October 31, 1989 - October 31, 2014.
Charter member of the first chapter of the Society of the Holy Trinity.

Chrismated Antiochian Orthodox, eve of Mary of Egypt Sunday, A.D. 2015

Terry W Culler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 2227
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #51 on: June 09, 2020, 07:27:58 AM »
News outlets of all kinds are profit directed enterprises.  If you want to change their positions the best way to do it is to hit their pocketbooks.  Cancel subscriptions.  Contact people you do business with and ask them not to advertise in their venues.  Transfer your support to other organizations.  Of course that's getting harder to do with newspapers as so many have bitten the dust, but it's still possible in many places.  The NYT has the right to do what it wants with submitted articles, editorial opinions, etc.  But it frankly has far less leverage than it used to.  Rather than complain--act.
Goodnewsforabadworld.wordpress.com

David Garner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 7357
    • View Profile
    • For He is Good and Loves Mankind
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #52 on: June 09, 2020, 07:53:08 AM »
News outlets of all kinds are profit directed enterprises.  If you want to change their positions the best way to do it is to hit their pocketbooks.  Cancel subscriptions.  Contact people you do business with and ask them not to advertise in their venues.  Transfer your support to other organizations.  Of course that's getting harder to do with newspapers as so many have bitten the dust, but it's still possible in many places.  The NYT has the right to do what it wants with submitted articles, editorial opinions, etc.  But it frankly has far less leverage than it used to.  Rather than complain--act.

Or, as I do, ignore and speak out.

My brother loves to cite the NYT as "proof" of his positions on various things (except the one time I cited them back to him and he said "well, the NYT was wrong then").  Every time he does I tell him their coverage carries zero weight with me.  They lie.  They lie intentionally.  They tell us they lie (particularly with this whole gatekeeper/guardians of the public discourse nonsense).  They have an agenda.  I'm not on board with it.  They don't get to be the arbiters of truth when they slant their coverage as they do.  Just taking the Kavanaugh matter versus the Biden matter as an example, it is apparent to anyone who has an ounce of integrity that they covered the two stories radically differently, as did most of the news media.  So why bother assuming anything they print is accurate, when we know they make coverage decisions and bury the lede in order to push a partisan agenda?  We can go on and talk about abortion policy and gun control or whatever else.  The simple fact is, the NYT is a Democrat-left organization.  They are a sounding board for the Democratic Party.  Pretending they are otherwise is stupid.  People who try to convince you they are otherwise are liars.

I'd wager the NYT fans here don't listen to Rush Limbaugh or read The Federalist or even National Review, and on the rare occasion they do, they discount them immediately.  That is, apparently, all well and good (I certainly think it is).  But the only difference between those outlets and the NYT is everyone acknowledges they come from a position and slant the news.  The NYT pretends to be above it all and so very, very trustworthy, when in fact they have an agenda and actively push it not only on the opinion page, but in their news coverage.  They are, therefore, lying liars who lie and not to be trusted.
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #53 on: June 09, 2020, 07:56:54 AM »
One problem with public action like boycotts today is that, while they might work in a healthy society, they can be counterproductive and produce the opposite of their intended effect in an extremely divided society. Many industries, but especially purveyors of news, can only hope to appeal to a fraction of people, and the more the appeal to one half the less they appeal to the other half. If Trump called for a boycott of, say, Walmart, suddenly liberals who hate Walmart would be going out of their way to support it. If Colin Kaepernick and BLM demand a boycott of Cheerios, lots of people will be sure to buy Cheerios. So prefer not to boycott, at least publicly. If I am too disturbed by a companyís actions to patronize it, I will privately tell the manager why I wonít be going there anymore, and perhaps privately spread the word to my friends and family. But I wonít try to make a public deal out of it.

Also, I donít watch movies for the actorsí politics in the first place, so their idiotic politics donít bother me as long as they can act. I donít enjoy the taste of political ice cream, so I judge Ben and Jerry on price and taste, not on what they plan to do with the profits.

Charles Austin

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 13579
    • View Profile
    • Charles is Coloring
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #54 on: June 09, 2020, 08:11:23 AM »
Gee, David Garner, Tell us how you really feel 
Retired ELCA pastor. Iowa born. Back home from Sioux City after three days and a pleasant reunion of the East High School class of - can you believe it! - 1959.

David Garner

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 7357
    • View Profile
    • For He is Good and Loves Mankind
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #55 on: June 09, 2020, 08:21:13 AM »
One problem with public action like boycotts today is that, while they might work in a healthy society, they can be counterproductive and produce the opposite of their intended effect in an extremely divided society. Many industries, but especially purveyors of news, can only hope to appeal to a fraction of people, and the more the appeal to one half the less they appeal to the other half. If Trump called for a boycott of, say, Walmart, suddenly liberals who hate Walmart would be going out of their way to support it. If Colin Kaepernick and BLM demand a boycott of Cheerios, lots of people will be sure to buy Cheerios. So prefer not to boycott, at least publicly. If I am too disturbed by a companyís actions to patronize it, I will privately tell the manager why I wonít be going there anymore, and perhaps privately spread the word to my friends and family. But I wonít try to make a public deal out of it.

Also, I donít watch movies for the actorsí politics in the first place, so their idiotic politics donít bother me as long as they can act. I donít enjoy the taste of political ice cream, so I judge Ben and Jerry on price and taste, not on what they plan to do with the profits.

For me, it isn't really a matter of boycotting.  What I hope to accomplish is the realization on the part of my liberal friends who constantly apologize for the legacy media that we're not falling for the banana in the tailpipe anymore.  It's a more direct tactic than boycotting, which is somewhat passive aggressive to me.  Rather, I am in the business of delegitimizing.

Instead of responding with "I canceled my subscription to the NYT," I respond with "I give zero credence to anything the NYT prints."

Now, if the NYT wants to pivot and market itself as The Federalist and National Review and others on the right, or The Nation or Mother Jones or Rolling Stone on the left, then I might be able to grant some legitimacy.  I frequently read publications I disagree with.  I want the perspective of the other side.  What I won't do is give legitimacy to a supposed "newspaper" that in fact is a marketing arm of the Democratic Party.  They are not a newspaper.  They are advocates.  They should be treated as such.
Orthodox Reader and former Lutheran (LCMS and WELS).

Dan Fienen

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 12583
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #56 on: June 09, 2020, 08:36:28 AM »
I don't know that I ever gave Rush Limbaugh credence.  He is a news entertainer nothing more. I long thought that Bill O' Reilly deserved an Emmy for acting for his ability to intone his signature "Fair and Balanced" with a straight face. So why should I blindly allow the NYT to tell me what to think when they blatantly are partisan, burry stories that are unfavorable to their chosen side, and don't cover denials 9f accusations against those they disfavor.
Pr. Daniel Fienen
LCMS

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #57 on: June 09, 2020, 08:37:18 AM »
I think cancelling a subscription does send a message. I just wouldnít do so as part of an organized public call for people to cancel subscriptions. Grass roots action can only really work one leaf of grass at a time.

The problem I have with saying I give zero credence to anything it prints is that a) it isnít true in my case, and b) the person I would be saying that to has probably read many perfectly reasonable articles in the Times. So I would in their view simply be saying something about myself. Rather, I say I donít pay for the Times, but I do read it when available for free and read it the way I would any left wing publication.

peter_speckhard

  • ALPB Administrator
  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 17524
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #58 on: June 09, 2020, 08:42:29 AM »
I don't know that I ever gave Rush Limbaugh credence.  He is a news entertainer nothing more. I long thought that Bill O' Reilly deserved an Emmy for acting for his ability to intone his signature "Fair and Balanced" with a straight face. So why should I blindly allow the NYT to tell me what to think when they blatantly are partisan, burry stories that are unfavorable to their chosen side, and don't cover denials 9f accusations against those they disfavor.
I think ought to rethink Limbaugh. I listened when he first came out because he was the only source I had for a different take on the news. He treated as big stories the things that mattered to me but would be buried by the newspapers. Once I got the internet in my house, I stopped listening. I could get everything he was giving me in a fraction of the time, on my schedule, and without annoying commercials. But in recent years when Iíve heard him, yes there is the shtick of an entertainer, but I think he is far smarter and more insightful than people give him credit for. He could be a serious social critic rather than an entertaining one, but he enjoys doing what he does too much.

Steven W Bohler

  • ALPB Contribution Leader
  • *****
  • Posts: 3791
    • View Profile
Re: The End of the NYT
« Reply #59 on: June 09, 2020, 08:58:19 AM »
Let us not be intentionally stupid. The discussion about changes in the police force does not mean abolishing law enforcement. It does not mean there would be no police.

Exactly.

In many States that would mean the County Sheriff's Department taking over.  Sheriffs are elected on four year terms and much of their staff is subject to at-will employment with possible termination every fourth year, depending on the winds of political fortune.

In some States that would mean that the State Police/State Patrol would take over.  With only the top command subject to political appointment enforcement is likely to be more apolitical or heavy-handed...take your pick. 

In some of those States having the SP take over would mean no more enforcement of local ordinances.  No big deal, until your neighbor's tethered dog howls all through the night and the only enforcement option would be a LOCAL noise control or animal control ordinance. 

And, by the way, local parking ordinances typically carry fines of <$50.00.   State level vehicle code parking fines (with costs) can easily exceed $100.00.

You get what you pay for.

Yes, and if the county sheriff's department takes over, then that means the rest of the county will have to foot the bill for the city's law enforcement.  While, at the same time, freeing up the money heretofore allocated by the city for law enforcement for other projects -- which benefit the city but perhaps not the rest of the county.  Nice.  You pay my bills, you take the physical risk, you lose law enforcement resources for your part of the county. And we get to spend the money on stuff just for us.