The July report for consumer prices from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, which came out today, showed that prices rose less than 3% in the previous twelve months.
Thank you, Heather. I am so so tired of The New York Times continuing to bash President Biden and now VP Harris. Writing to the paper voicing my dismay at their bias has done nothing to stop it.
I cancelled years ago... after reading the paper for decades. I recall the foul looks I once got when I carried around a copy in the Deep South. It might as well have been Pravda.
Yet the strange thing is that it's a curate's egg -- "good in parts" -- so the stink from journalistic incompetence by design wafts its way round the world, while some excellent ed-op and other material still gets published.
Selling mixed prejudices, because prejudices sell. Tarting up the old lady sells... News, apparently, doesn't... I find that hard to believe.
Readers aren't all junkies. Once upon a time, journalists weren't all pushers, weren't all hacks...
Undermining trust, rotting the bonds of community, cannot possibly work for long. Fast bucks can make for lasting failure. That of a great newspaper, that of a once great and immensely promising country.
First, consider that you are emulating the thinking of Trump: "a great newspaper, that of a once great and immensely promising country." And, then consider, that the NYT that has enhanced our appreciation of the world for many decades, requires our vigilance and confronting feedback for us to be responsible and effective. This issue (responsibility and vigilance) prevails as citizens of the world we live in, and as parents, friends, students.
Obviously, consider it lazy to simply abandon what we find fault with.
P.S. I continue to benefit greatly from attending to Tom Friedman's wisdom.
Interesting take on it. My take is that the New York Times' irresponsible reporting and editing helped get Trump elected in 2016. I dropped my subscription shortly thereafter. They don't seem to have learned anything since. It is not a democratic institution that can be influenced by our "feedback."
Susanna, I don't think it was just NYT. I noticed most of the media I had previously depended on prior to 2015, going nuts for the jerk who had no experience, no empathy, no civility, little intelligence beyond that of the con artist. He was the "new thing" and our decent media in large numbers jumped on board the Trump train all the way to Trumplandia. We are still recovering from the trip and that fool wants in again and has a whole lot of media support. Any criticism of Trump seems muted and tentative while criticism of Biden who has actually done a whole lot for this nation is loud, rude, and undeserved. How do we hold the media accountable. I pointed out a really bad pro-Trump but inaccurate item on NPR recently and only got back a standard "thank you for your comment; we'll get back to you on it." They never will. I did actually hear one criticism of Trump today on NPR, tentative, honest, and there! Shock!
Boy what rubes are you folks. "Whole lot of media support"? REALLY? Except for Fox (which of course is highly influential), SHOW me the "support" Trump has. The Times CALLED FOR HIM TO STEP ASIDE (which for me is a disaster, because we - the Democrats - will win SO MUCH MORE EASILY against Trump precisely because he is a disaster than we would against Nikki Halley or heaven forbid even Vance.). Again, as with the slanted media I have requessted, do not give my your opinions, those are worth about as much as MY opinions, GIVE ME FACTUAL REFERENCES to articles which are slanted. And by slanted I don't mean negative. It is the responsibility of the press to report the news whether good, bad or neutral. The negative reporting surrounding Biden should have been expected, he has shown repeatedly over many months a declining ability to focus and speak clearly. They should have been exposing that all along. And if anything, it might (if you take a few seconds to think) be the best thing that the press ever could have done (to get Biden to step aside) because he would have LOST THE ELECTION TO TRUMP ALMOST WITHOUT QUESTION and now with Harris firmly in the role of nominee, we actually have the chance to have the second black President and the first woman. HUGELY GOOD for the country. Trump is not. So I fail to see why you keep attacking ME when all I have asked for is proof (that you all claim you have read) of the so-called one-sidedness of the press, favoring Trump. I don't mean vague hand-waving, I mean what you do for research, i.e., you write down the articles and dates and page numbers and quote the sections. You do that and I promise you I will read every single line referenced and if I think you have a case, I also promise you I will mea culpa to the entire blog.
The problem is, I think there is no "there" there, i.e., the so-called articles you all claim are biased simply don't exist. You take a headline, misread it or interrpret it in the wrong way and then say "there's proof that the article is biased" except when you read it, there is no bias.
The TIMES reporting helped to get Trump elected? ARE YOU FROM MARS?!!! The Times avidly supported Hillary Clinton, but hey, you know, Hillary had some REAL baggage and the Times NEWS section (unlike the Editorial section) was obligated to report on that stuff. That was Hilary's burden to bear, she was the one who did stuff that looked at best fishy and are worst UGLY, and sadly, she was facing in the election the worst monster we have ever seen. But the newspaper's responsibility it to report the truth and they did. Sadly, the people in this country are as a group way to dumb to actually tease out the bad stuff from the good stuff and she lost, not by much either. She won the popular vote and only lost in the swing states which Biden turned around 4 years later.
Hilary was her own best enemy, for so so so many reasons and while I avidly supported her like a good Democrat, I was not stunned by her loss because I knew she was vulnerable. Trump's team was able to jump on it and divert attention away from his own nonsense (with one major difference... all of HIS stuff was "private" nonsense, while her stuff occurred while she was in service to the government and that made a HUGE difference).
I believe that Trump's grotesque moves WHILE he was President will as they did in 2020, hold as major negatives against him in 2024, especially now that Biden is out of the race. Those issues are/were just as relevant as the issues regarding Hilary in 2016, and Kamala Harris has few if any similar issues. She has been one of the most upstanding public servants in a long time, and I will be stunned if she loses this election.
There are actual stats out there on the number of articles the NYT put out that referenced HRC in a negative way, especially about her 'emails'. Many more of those than negatives about Trump.
Unfortunately I don't have those stats on hand, but people out there have crunched the actual numbers.
I agree with these productive talks. I long ago grasped the ‘understanding the audience’ reporting but ….
that the fight is going to be ongoing ..even after the Harris/Walz Win ..is a given. Our factual gains make little dent but good writing/reporting/headlines does. And I would agree the Republicans cornered the headlines with THE GRIFTER, THE CON hype using drama and a popular seduction , if not even cult approach. It worked …PAST TENSE.
Enough have now come back/seen the light , the eloquence of dedicated writers,historians,and amazing leadership has prevailed , mightily preserved, I favor.
The fight is not over.
We can never be complacent again.
Hopefully that lesson has received the A+ , TBD on 11/5/24 .
It requires a LANDSLIDE.
It requires GOTV/Volunteers amassing/Postcards/All hands on Deck! The grassroots led the charge , the American Rally Forth The Flag miracles is working.
Stay The Course 🫵
I love the ‘’write it that way’’ closing answer line…BIDEN’s answer! Bravo my captain 🫶
The writing is clearly on the wall. Newspaper are JUST beginning to correct their lack of equal coverage..in part due too -to the new joy/hope/charisma that sells sells sells…we have a L O N G way to go before equality and facts surpass love of money and control . Few making the big bucks will like the road…and those who contribute a THANK YOU EVERY TIME!
It’s perfectly clear to those with real leadership abilities …
Biden made a huge mistake with the border if for no reason then the optics of do nothing. I cringed for 3 years wondering why he was so dense. Maybe it’s because he is dense.
And we all benefitted from their endless, baseless attacks on Hillary Clinton in 2016, "But her emails," /s. And here we are the old playbook being recycled.
If you really believe that ALL the attacks on Hillary Clinton were baseless, you need to read some real history. Hillary was so vulnerable from many of her positions as both Senator and Secretary of State. She was a terribly weak candidate (I was so stunned when Biden decided to step aside for her, even though voting for a woman was something I was really anxious to do, I just wasn't convinced she was the right one).
John, so you were looking for perfect, huh. Clinton was a very qualified candidate, knew her stuff, and was far superior in every way to "the monster" as you call Trump. I did not see the NYT pushing nearly as hard to point out Trump's total inappropriateness for any office let alone president, then he proved it. There are plenty of folks saying your exact criticisms of Harris right now. Could it be, dare I say it, Misogyny or a fear of women in power? Nah, couldn't be that!
There is a problem with the NYT and reporting on the Israeli genocide in Gaza. Israeli relies on the "Israel Lobby" to control reactions. The head of the NYT is of a Jewish family that owned the paper for many years. I checked to see who the major shareholders are. It is Vanguard and Black Rock with controlling interest. They want profit, not controversy. V and BR have controlling interest in many important companies. One is Boeing. Boeing has put profit and share price ahead of engineering and safety. This country has a problem of profit over best practice.
If you don't like the New York Times, try CONSORTIUM NEWS. There you won't get a defense of US foreign policy, in Gaza, Ukraine, or anywhere else. It's full of former Peabody winners who've soured on the mainstream media and gone alternative. Scolding inevitably, and little appreciative of the difficulties of being the world's hegemonic power, - but throwing our many failures and atrocities into sharp relief. Give it a try.
Good luck with that. Be ignorant by choice. The Times is by far the best, most objective news source going these days. If you choose to get your "news" from MSNBC or CNN or some blog (like this one) then you are closing yourself off to actual facts and you will suffer for it, as will our entire country, if enough people turn out to be like you.
Wow, what a world we live in today. "I'd rather trust some unknown person writing a blog and their fans than an actual newspaper that has standards." Amazing.
Maybe I'm fortunate to read in several languages. But, for starters, someone here mentioned both The Guardian and the English language version of Haaretz...
"Letters from an American" is not "some unknown person writing a blog." Neither are the offerings from Timothy Snyder, Dan Rather, Joyce Vance, Simon Rosenberg, George Lakoff, Robert Reich, Bill Kristol, and The Intercept.
I trust their integrity a lot more than I trust the NYTimes or WSJ at present.
Except NONE of those report news objectively, they provide opinions. People need to differentiate, opinions and news are NOT the same thing. Sigh...
And I never put the WSJ in the same class as the Times. WSJ was purchased by the Murdochs and it has never been the same since. The Times is still owned by the Ochs/Salzburger family (as it has been for almost 120 years) and has steadfastly REFUSED to become fodder for the sell-out crowd.
And if you can't trust the Times, you (and the rest of us) are in a world of hurt, my friend, that has NOTHING AT ALL to do with Trump.
But..... I still subscribe because out of their political reportage (which I agree is in need of a make-over), you do get pretty good coverage of world news, sports, and business. And, of course, Metropolitan Diary.
Which is why I will likely keep it for now. But I wouldn’t pay full rate. Every time my annual special ends, I threaten to terminate and they extend it another year. Hope your not paying full rates.
Can you please provide even ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of "deliberate misinformation"??? Maybe you can, I am sure it has happened, but you will need to do a VERY diligent search because from where I sit (and I read the paper religiously every single day, cover to cover) because the number of times that has happened over many years has got to be single digits if that.
And I am talking about NEWS, not columns or editorials. Those are always subject to points of view and can clearly contain infomation that is not vetted adequately. That should NOT be the case with actual hard news, which the Times has extremely rigorous policies on checking and double-checking. And when they are wrong, they own up pretty much instantly.
I cancelled my long term subscription with a note why a few years ago and just picked it back up for 4$ a month. I will cancel after trial. I like to read all the reporting during election season.
At the end of trial, if you threaten to end they will extend the special another year with no strings. So I give them $50 a year and I do receive good international and national news.
Hmmm so you DO admit that you receive good national news. Politics is national news. So how do you distinguish the "good" national reporting from the "awful" political reporting? Its all pretty much the same, and from where I sit, I can't even tell the difference.
Me too. They sicken me along with WaPo. Each journalist staying with them sickens me too. I am looking at the Tech Bros and the money they can throw at this election and it is frightening. How did we let them get so powerful? I see them as an evil that we need to revolt against. Not that the other super wealthy throwing money at this election are any more tasteful. It is just so wrong that we have all of the billionaires who are heading onto trillionairehood at some point.
Again as I have asked repeatedly, could you present even a SINGLE ARTICLE in which you claim a reporter (not a columnist but an actual reporter, like Maggie Haberman or Peter Baken) has lied in the Times? I challenge this because it is a vile accusation and if true would mean my entire belief system is screwed up. But sorry, I don't think it is. I think you are screwed up here, charging things that simply aren't true and if that is it, you should be ashamed of yourself.
I cancelled it when they banned me for commenting what I would do when Trump was laid in state at the capital and said I would crap in front of cameras on the steps of the Capital. (An assume statement to make for the world to view, isn’t it.) And they refused to lift the ban. So they lost big time with my special sale rate ya ya.
But I will definitely urinate at his chosen grave site or toss cat shit from a distance if necessary. And I have 7 cats to choose from having a ready supply.
So typical of people who obscure the truth and throw "stones". As they say, you shouldn't live in a glass house, then. The use of foul language is just one clear example of your bias, so you can hardly accuse others of bias yourself.
Same here. It runs out in November -- nice coincidence. I've been subscribing to the Guardian, both UK and US digital editions, for several years, and just picked up Haaretz to follow Israel-Palestine news.
Haaretz is such an opinionated paper LOL! To give up the times and choose that left-wing rag is nonsensical. Don't get me wrong, I am FAR left wing especially when it comes to Israel (can't stand Netanyahu and believe they need to withdraw from Gaza and give that land to the Palestinians, oh yes and I am Jewish too) but to quote Haaretz while denigrating the NY Times is the height of absurdity.
Well, maybe (and I am happy for your heart) but you have also dumbed down your brain, because you are ignoring the best source of unbiased news available in this country. Wow, what a move forward that must be. Now you can rely on blogs and podcasts by people who have NOTHING but their own axes to grind and aren't held to ANY standards at all! Bravo!
Please provide a SINGLE EXAMPLE of their "biased reporting". IE, this means NEWS articles, not editorials or columnists, please. Those are going to have biases (and they should).
My guess is that you couldn't pick a biased article out if you fell over it. Because in fact there simply aren't many, probably not more than a few a month if that. THE NY TIMES is one of the most objective papers in the world and thats why it is also the BIGGEST paper in the world because people who count use it consistently.
Please distinguish... all of their reporting is in some sense investigative work. And if you feel that there is a bias in their reporting, I would LOVE for YOU to be the one to point out an actual article where this can be shown. I am sure there are some, but you and everyone else here seems to suggest that occurs in virtually every story and that simply is such nonsense. Sigh...
I have been saying she needs to stick to her winning formula of going directly to the people and then rebutting Trump's and others' lies on social media.
They have been doing that, and Harris and Walz have wisely ignored them. I am saying that if the MSM is not supporting democracy, which they clearly are not, then what use are they? I feel none. I go to better sources for information. If we stop 1) subscribing for money, 2) stop consuming, they will have contributed to their own demise. Harris and Walz are going to the voters, and clearly that is the best use of their time.
They do answer questions and lay out their policies and if the press is too lazy to figure it out without a one-on-one that they can brag about and market for days, and then totally bomb as they have been doing, and then blame it on Harris, and start gathering reasons to not believe in a capable woman than what have they, then too bad for them. And, while many may not notice, it seems the readership here is noticing that MSM does not have the same standards for Donald Trump. I don't care if their families are threatened if they ask him things he does not want to hear, then either their publications should back them, or they should find another line of work.
Maybe the outcome of something that has gone wrong in America -- living to work, not working to live.
And doing everything "aggressively", so that work becomes like war (except that everyone would be dead under this kind of management in a real war) and workers end up with combat fatigue because of management behaving like the enemy...
One consequence: people work till they drop... and those who can retire at 60 get the hell out despite, in many cases, being fit in mind and body for years to come...
In a hard-working but workaholism-free society, people might be willing to stay on for longer and help train young recruits...
Thank you Linda; after MSM's 2016 presidential reporting debacle I follow individual reporters (even books) on specific topics & digital authors only.
With Dems in Chicago shortly, MSM will distort history itself, searing 1968 political history. This coming week, I look forward to HCR's real time reports in her full historical context method.
Bryan, I totally agree with you. I am reading Project 2025 in a Democrats Abroad bookclub. I have read the Forward and 10 chapters, am starting on an 11th one. We are skipping around. I have to balance this bad prose and nastiness with some books too. I really appreciated Prof Ruth Ben-Ghiat's book Strongmen which I recently read, for its insights and history of fascism.
As a PAID subscriber, I have reading weekly preview chapters of Dr. Bandy X. Lee's new book, "The Psychology of Trump Contagion: An Existential Threat .... I just received and will read her "Epilogue" in the book later this morning.
Dr. Lee's forensic psychiatrist group has been directly involved in a campaign regarding DJT's 9/18/24 sentencing on the 34 jury determined felonies & the Defendant's ten (10) contempt convictions already decided by the Court as violations of the Court's Protective Order (PTO) to protect jurors & witnesses.
What "better sources"? Please provide citations for that. There are none that I can find, certainly not local (US) sources. There are some fine journalism examples elsewhere, but in the US, the NY Times is top of the list. And you, like virtually everyone else on this blog, mimics the nonsensical accusations without providing any hard evidence (or any evidence at all). Just because you SAY IT IS SO doesn't make it so.
Have a great day if you can get your head into fresh air.
Jon, you can have your opinion, but I don't agree. I think the NYT has covered this election so poorly, and continues to do so, that it outweighs anything else. One example is that the NYT called for Biden to drop out of the race based on one debate where he was under the weather and barraged with fascist propaganda, with the station doing no live fact checking nor did they shut Trump's mike off when he ranted as they had promised to do. Trump has given numerous lying ranting speeches and have we hear the same response.*****
I have had correspondence with editors from the Times that is so off base and stupid it could be like talking to a MAGA or Russian Bot. Not something I am willing to spend my time doing. I am also not White and male and so might take more offense to it then you do. I live a multinational life and since I spend more time outside of the US right now than in it I want sources that do what I need them to do, when I consume US news which because of the election I am doing more so. The NYT does not fit the bill. In fact, since I stopped subscribing to them my quality of life has gone up. ******
I get the AP each day. While I do not always like their slant, I don't pay them money for their opinions. I get the Guardian. I donate to them, they are independent news. I read both the US and the European editions. I also get Foreign Affairs, the Carnegie Foundation for Peace, Substacks from people like Heather Cox Richardson, Timothy Snyder, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, and other people who also write books. I still get news from my US city, and neighborhood, which give me information that is useful. I would not say that about NYT.*****
As for fresh air, while my US city does not offer much of that, my city in the EU tends to have air quality in the green zone. Also, the walls of my house are made with loam, an ancient material that insulates for temperature and sound and also absorbs toxins from the air. it is having a big revival here. My drinking water is clean from the tap too, but it is night here and I am not going out. As it is still day in the US I hope you can get to fresh air too.
Yes, and Kamala ought to answer journalists’ gotcha and click-bait questions (that are so shallow and meaningless) with substantive policy answers. Let her insist on her own agenda at any pressers.
And shut it down & tell them why & walk away IF they treat her disrespectfully—recently Lawrence O’Donnell (MSNBC) had an excellent segment going ballistic over (many of) the press’s outburst-hostile-clambering style of lobbing (not asking) questions at, for example, Biden & his press secretary (as opposed to the softball manner TFFFG is questioned): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD-oTJ49nls
She's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. At the moment, "she's not doing enough pressers, not talking about policy." You can bet that the minute she does, she will be ciriticized further. Why bother? Especially when the other side isn't? As Reed Galen on The Daily Beast today said, Trump is like those 90's mix tapes that just play over and over.
Follow the click-bait? No, Kamala should take over the pressers by providing substance of giving policy responses and ignore gotcha and click-bait questions.
Does anyone know if Harris/Walz has a nice, comprehensive website of their own where they've made all of their policy/issue positions available for public view? Whenever I go to a candidate's website, all they seem to offer are opportunities to donate money. I've long thought it odd that politicians whine about bias in the press, then ignore the most common way to bypass the press and get information directly to the public -- a well-designed website that fronts for a good database of material, including supporting links for fact-checking.
I dropped my NY Times subscription after 30(!) headlines in a row in a Google search, about Biden’s age following Hur’s report. And following their non-stop attacks on Biden after the debate, I have never looked back…
That's about when I dropped it. If they want to fight the Wall Street Journal and the NY Post for subscribers and more importantly advertisers -- go for it.
Natalie Burdick and others -- I'm very grateful for the comments about the NYTimes. I cancelled at the end of 2023. (Because I live in Canada, I subscribe for only digital.) WAPO is another matter, and I pay a very small monthly fee there for digital only.
With Joe Kahn as executive editor of the Tarnished Lady who has made it known that defending democracy is partisan and he won't do it, what can one expect.
To really defend democracy perhaps it is time to torpedo the New York Times and advocate for people canceling their subscriptions. The law of diminishing profits seems to be the only thing Kahn and cohorts understand. Funny the editorial board has no problem cosseting a fascist wannabe and doesn't worry about appearing partisan.
If you mean by defending democracy that the NY times STOPS being a fair and unbiased news source, that is nuts! Their job is to REPORT, accurately, not "defend democracy". If you have actual evidence in dates and pages, please post them because I have their complete index at my disposal (I subscribe) and I have seen no (or at least extremely little) evidence of this bogus claim. All you critics are sounding like Trump, just making up stuff in the hours that no one questions you. You should think about that before making false criticisms or at least be ready to back up your allegations with dates and page numbers. Trust me I will look up every citation and see if you have a valid claim.
I take accusations of journalistic bias seriously having worked for a news paper in a former life and trust me if the NY times is biased in anyway its in FAVOR of democracy and our current president and not in favor of trump. But I suspect what you see is that they don't come down hard enough on trump for your satisfaction but that is just them doing the proper job of a newspaper.
Jon, they are neither reporting fairly and accurately, nor defending democracy, but while that may not be "their job" it is their role in a democracy, and if they cannot do that, then we should not be wasting our time supporting them.
I, too, am a retired journalist. Just yesterday, I posted about their extreme bias in the comments section. They're losing subscribers for a reason AND harming their own reputation. Very disappointing. Read carefully. They use deprecatory language when describing Harris Walz and laudatory language for Trump. Very disappointing, especially the decks, which erroneously used the term "rebuffed" in describing Harris.
We all read enough papers to know that the NYTimes is not reporting fairly. They have printed seven or eight times as many Trump and Republican related stories as Biden stories. I stopped the times went they relentlessly went after Biden to withdraw from the race.
Try to find a NY Times story where they call Trump on his lies. They report them as fact.
Even Maggie Haberman has towed the line when reporting on Trump and she is one of the best journalists they have.
And the WAPO is only marginally better because they have Jennifer Rubin, Catherine Rampell, Max Boot, Alexandra Petri, Dana Milbank to offset the bias of their editors.
I just don't think you're going to get a lot of support on your position here Jon -- sorry.
That's why all of us need to "take up oxygen" and make sure to get this information out there. I always re-post on all the legislators in my state and have started posting on Mike Johnson's page as well.
You just got an example in the article. I’ve seen it done by Fox for years. Take a true set of circumstances and, sure, report the facts but write it in ways that make the facts seem questionable. Or at least seem to be indicating something other than what they do. I’ve seen articles where the first two or three paragraphs are a basic synopsis, followed by the next three or four that pull in marginally relative facts and quotes that don’t necessarily correlate, but add to the storytelling in a way that makes it seem they do. I’ve seen them pick and choose quotes from people who slant the point of view of the entire article without providing equally valid quotes that would balance it out. Writing is an art; not a science. And art can tell you whatever vision of the truth the artist wants you to see. All without ever actually lying or ignoring the facts. NYT has become adept at that kind or article. It’s a shame. I used to like and respect them for refusing to dip into the fray.
That whole "a neurologist visited the White House umpteen times in the past six months; is Biden on the verge of collapse?" nonsense from just a few months ago is the best example I can think of lately. This is what Mr. Rosen above considers probative and unbiased reporting?
Granted, I'm not interested in or set up for keeping track of published articles in enough detail to get a statistically accurate view of bias and distortions, so I well recognize my vulnerability to my own millieu, biases, and prejudices. Instead, I'm just sitting by the river of information watching stuff float by, wondering if the water really smells funny or is it just me...
I cancelled my subscription over a month ago. (I did keep the puzzles, however. Bad me!) Nothing the NYT has published since then has made me regret my decision.
A buddy of mine went to his public library every week and copied The NY Times crossword puzzle. He would read the paper at the library as well, but only the Sunday edition.
What Jon Rosen means is, How would you know that 'nothing the NYT has published since then has made you regret your decision' if you've canceled your subscription.
How I know is that every Substack I read refers time to time to headlines or things they do, and my life has improved greatly lessening their aggravation to me. I do not miss it at all. In fact, I would say I am better off, because dealing with stupid editors who do not have the life experience to even understand my words as I intend is not a good use of my life. Same for WaPo. Even not doing their crosswords, for which one does not need subscription with my daughter. We are reading books and other things instead. And, reading Project 2025 in my Democrats Abroad bookclub makes me very clear why I am not supporting them. I also know my fascist history to some extent, and am not participating in supporting their propaganda.
I still check the headlines once in awhile and it still favors Trump even though Harris/Walz are far superior representatives of Democracy.
And if the NYTimes is such a great defender of democracy why have there been so few headlines on Project 2025 and it's myriad threats to democracy. Or stories tying Trump and Vance and the rest of the Republicans to Project 2025?
The truth: I don't really care, it's what came before that I objected to. Also the truth: You can still read the headlines, and many articles, even when you do not have a subscription.
I still get their emails with news summaries. I still read their headlines (which, even when they don't match the content of the story, are hideous). I occasionally get a gifted article. I can't understand defending them. The NY Times Pitchbot nails it on the head. And I used to even take the paper version of the Sunday edition, and read it cover it cover--even though I'm in Nebraska.
Wow what weird newspaper are you reading LOL? I see nothing in the NY times today that "bashes" Biden! And I see nothing in Heather's article that says this or bashes the.ny run news either! If anything for almost two weeks now their articles have been extremely favorable to Harris/ Walz.
Please please quote me dates and pages of articles but NOT columnists or editorials though, those are not relevant, I am asking for news articles which you suggest slam Biden or Harris unfairly... I suggest you can't find any. Everything i see in the news section is fact and quite clearly established by good reporting.
It's the headlines and placement of articles. Headlines about the Ashville speech should be, "Trump lies about economy." About the X "conversation, "Trump gibberish."
Lately, I have been thinking about the blurred lines that arise between op-ed and the news sections of newspapers. I grew up in the era of hard copy newspapers, and those had a clear structure to them: Front Page, International, National, State/Local, Opinion, Sports, Social/Special Interest.
Most newspapers retain that structure in their e-editions but if you are clicking through from social media or reading on some newspaper apps, the lines between opinion and news get blurred.
The other trend is the click-bait headline and short summary in a social media post that people see without reading the article. These headlines create perceptions.
I would like to see more in-depth reporting on the lies that Trump states and the true horror of the impact his policies would have. But now is not the time I will be canceling subscriptions.
I agree. You have to hold your nose when seeing the political reportage - and really it's the headline writers who may not be the reporters. But outside of politics, the reportage in the NYT is worth hanging onto. And Metropolitan Diary, Wordle, Spelling Bee, thank goodness. A small price to pay
Mr. Rosen, I see that you aren't getting very many responsive answers to your requests for elaboration. As tempting as it may be to apologize for the group, because you deserve a better answer, I'll decline in favor of a more process-oriented answer. Firstly, a great many people don't distinguish very clearly between op-ed and news, a confusion heartily supported by op-ed writers who, in the best of circumstances, include verifiable facts within their articles that support their opinions/analyses. And secondly, I suspect that I'm not the only one who just doesn't keep track of news articles and trends like I expect a working journalist would. Instead, the things that create a lasting "bump" of memory are likely to tend to the outragreous and to have fuzzy attribution, and having a "sense of a trend" is more a feeling than a judgment.
I understand that my reliance on using such vague "impressions" to form my own opinions makes me more vulnerable to misinformation campaigns that drift by. On the other hand, I've got other things to do, thank God, besides obsess over the news. That's why I use as many sources as I can find to get my sense of the world and hope I'm right enough to get through the day.
I think I saw you mention that you're a professional journalist, right? May I ask, where do you get your news from, and who do you work for?
I didn't expect to get many responses because factually speaking, it will be difficult to actually find real excerpts that uphold the view that the NY Times is biased, simply because those excerpts really don't exist (or if they do, there are extremely few available). Sure, the Times makes mistakes, but it is a scrupulously even-handed piece of journalism, which to agree at least a little with the complainers, is very rare. It is one of the few major papers that provides immediate feedback on errors, in the online version right in the stories themselves and typically within a day or so after publication. They also print these retractions prominently.
I was a professional journalist but that was many lives ago LOL, in the 60s and 70s. I worked for the Tucson Daily Citizen (now defunct) and prior to that the Arizona Daily Star (still in publication). Back then our journalism was stellar. I don't think it is anymore (I still read it occasionally as while I live in San Francisco, I have many friends from high school who still live in Tucson). It was acquired by one of the major accumulators of local papers back in the 90s I believe and now it is a homogenized relic with some AP news and some local fluff pieces but very little that would pass as outstanding journalism. Sadly, that is true of most local papers today.
I get my news from a variety of sources, including obviously the New York Times, with occasional glances at the WaPo (which has gone horrendously downhill since the Bezos acquisition, sigh), the LA Times and (said with nose held between two fingers) the Wall Street Journal. I also watch MSNBC, but as I have said, it is NOT journalism, it is the left-wing version of Fox Snooze. Since the commentators on MSNBC tend to tell the truth much more than those at Fox, I find it more palatable, but again, it is almost 100% opinion, not journalism. Favorite commentators are Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Alex Wagner, Stephanie Rule, Ari Melber and Nicole Wallace. I abhor Joy Reid, Lawrence O'Donnell and "Morning" Joe Scarborough, and refuse to watch them anymore. I can handle puffery, but I can't handle the constant pounding of their attitudes. I also enjoy watching Michael Steele (former RNC Chairperson who has abandoned the GOP at least for now) although the further we get away from his departure from his party, the harder line he gets and it starts to be officious, sigh. I also like Jonathan Capehart when he is on, although he also goes to far at times, IMHO.
I almost never watch Fox Snooze because it just takes too much work to listen to the drivel. I watch CNN at times, but relatively rarely. For news, it is slightly better than MSNBC, but what was once a pretty reputable television news operation has fallen on hard times, IMHO, and now is a lot more like MSNBC than it is like the NY Times. Where are you Ted Turner when we need you? (Did I REALLY say that? LOL)
I read plenty of books, particularly about politics. And of course I have been a daily reader of HCR's newsletter for over two years.
I am surprised by the emphasis on "headlines". Anyone who reads a headline and then goes on a rant about the "content" of news in papers is a freaking idiot, IMHO. Apparently that includes a LOT of people who read this blog, which again is surprising to me. Headlines are written by copy editors or a headline desk, which is designed to attract readers. It conveys a minimal amount of information, and is permitted to do so in an "attractive" (or if you prefer obnoxious LOL) manner, that is part of journalism. I remember writing stories at the Star or Citizen, waking up in the morning and looking at the paper and would be astonished at what the headline writer had done (astonished often in a bad way).
But for me, headlines were just to grab a set of eyes. If you use the headline as a benchmark for what is in the story, you are ignorant and uninformed. Read the ARTICLE, that is what the headline is there for, to draw your attention. But it does NOT have to convey much information, and it can even be somewhat deceptive without violating any real journalistic standards.
If you just stay with the headlines, then you are going to be disappointed and shocked, and you will continue to be ignorant. READ THE FREAKING ARTICLES. Then make up your mind.
As I have challenged, I would love to see ANY actual quotations from a NY Times political article that shows extreme (or even moderate) bias toward Trump. I state that it simply doesn't exist and while I might find that I am wrong on a couple or three occasions, it is NOT by any means a major problem, certainly not at the Times (although it is much more a problem nowadays at the LA Times, WaPO and certainly at the WSJ which is of course owned by the Murdochs).
I think (don't know for a fact, but it is suspicion) that people are just too lazy to actually READ things and so they figure they can get an idea by reading the headlines. Sorry folks, it is hard work to be diligent about what you want to criticize and you owe it to yourself AND to those who might listen to you to DO the work and then make u p your mind.
And anyone who STILL will say "the NY Times is biased towards Trump", at least IMHO, is just expressing their OWN bias against having to read things and finding them NOT "critical enough" because they have already taken a position and won't be open-minded enough to read and learn. That is a sorry state to be in. It is of course EXACTLY what we complain about with respect to the right-wing media and their minions, that "those people don't read anything". Sadly we have the same problem and it is, at least from my perspective, worse, because WE should know better.
With that, I am outa here. There is too much blather with very little actual content from the various talking heads on this blog and it just bores me. The number of people who "commented" on my challenge with (as you noted) nothing but vague comments and hand waving rather than actual citations is a joke and I can't waste my time anymore. If Heather wants to let this blog become just ANOTHER source of disinformation, with a hive mind that ignores facts and amplifies nonsensical opinions, that's her choice, it is after all her blog. But I pay a fee to read it and sadly I am now disillusioned that she doesn't weigh in here. Maybe she is worried about her source of income, I could understand that, but to me, this is now nothing but click-bait, just as bad (and maybe worse given how much smarter I think most of these people OUGHT to be) as the right-wing Maga propeller heads.
Have a nice day, week, month and election season. I hope there is still enough sanity in this country to elect Kamala, but judging from the idiots on BOTH sides of the political spectrum, I am not sure any of THEM deserve it.
The headline mentioned by HCR literally insults Kamala Harris’ speech before she even gives it. How do they know it will be “ light on details?” I’ve been reading the Times for years, and believe me, they have shown editorial bias repeatedly during that time. We can go all the way back to the run-up to the Iraq war if you like, but more recent examples include their focus on Clinton’s emails and Biden’s age while never exploring the truly insane, fascistic ranting of the Republican nominee. I haven’t cancelled yet, but I no longer read the paper and I feel quite well informed without it.
If you subscribe to the NYT and WaPo, you are supporting propagandists. Their models are no longer based on reporting the news, but rather on creating controversy. They have lost all credibility.
Most people won't drop the NYTimes until after the election. But like others here, story after story for the past 18 months by Ezra Klein and others dwelling ONLY on Biden's age and NEVER on Trump's was unforgivable.
They only care about the numbers. -- advertising dollars and total subscribers. Once either number hits their "tipping point" then maybe they will care. That's when to send the exchange.
If I wanted to read propaganda and lies, I’d read Russian news. It’s really too bad there isn’t an independent group to review media and report their biases.
Unadulterated bs. If anyone does that (only reads the headlines,) that is just their own fault. But obviously YOU don't read the articles or don't care because if you went past the headlines you would see how wrong you are.
Remarkable. A federal government that works for the people against the greed of corporations. And I have no doubt that Harris and Walz will build on this effort.
Republicans? They show every day that they work against the people's interests and, in fact, will cripple the government to suit their political interests.
Contrast the work that Walz championed to make sure that children are fed so that they can learn with Republican'ts failure to continue the child tax credit. How can returning millions of children to poverty be a slogan for their idea of government's responsibility to its people?
Remember the Republicans won't pass gun legislation banning weapons like the AR-15. Currently, gun violence is the leading cause of children's deaths. These Republicans are heinous people who don't want to feed hungry children, don't want to fund public education, and are perfectly fine with small children being gunned down in their classrooms and other places. What kind of wicked people are these??!!
Jenn, Very pious and religious ones. Just ask them and their millions of evangelical followers. I am an evangelical Christian, and my People have been brainwashed over the last fifty years that abortion is evil in all circumstances, the R’s are on their side in that, and thus nothing else matters. Everything you said is 100% true, and I agree with you 100%; however, there are literally
Millions of one issue voters. There really are……….It drives me insane, and is so shallow and stupid, and WRONG, and yes wicked.
The coalition of the fat cats of the world, fatter then ever before in our history, plus now that such fat cats control media not just industry, the repulsive wing of racists and creeps, PLUS the “Christians” is such a powerful group that a vile, perverted, evil and corrupt person like Trump can actually be elected. Our country is a mess right now. Plus, social media is a cancer. There is no shared reality anymore. Walter Cronkite and the local daily paper are not coming back. I am still fearful about the future even if we get rid of the poison that is Trump.
Thank you for putting this truth as baldly as it deserves. I continue to wonder what Republicans’ morals are. Every time I see an ad on TV asking for contributions to feed starving AMERICAN CHILDREN, I wonder. Having never voted for a Republican since Eisenhower, I watch them with increasing disgust. History gives some clues about their meanness, but not enough.
That has been one of my hot buttons for years. A well nourished child learns better than a hungry child. Study after study have shown this to be true.
When my daughter was in school, I was upset because the school would prevent kids that hadn't paid for lunch from eating and/or they would shame a child for getting Federally subsidized lunch. When we switched school districts everyone went through the line and got what they wanted. Plus breakfast was free as well. No shaming.
A well educated populace starts with well fed kids.
Gary, my late husband was a middle-school shop teacher. About five years before we passed the bill providing free breakfast and lunch to all Minnesota students, Glen came home on a Friday afternoon and just headed into his workroom in our basement. Usually, he was happy on Fridays - the weekend and all - but when I went down to ask about dinner I could see he was upset.
Turns out that on his way out of school that afternoon, he encountered one of his students carrying two backpacks - one on front, one on her back. She was smiling and skipping down the hall. Glen asked her what was in the packs so she showed him - food. She was happy because she would have something to eat over the weekend (provided by the local food shelf and organized by a few teachers). Glen was in tears he was so upset.
The following Monday, Glen volunteered to help with the Friday back pack hand outs. And learned a while lot about kids and hunger in his rather wealthy suburban school district.
Can’t tell you how thrilled I was when Walz signed that bill providing free breakfast and lunch. And though Glen had died two years before that,
Your last comments says it in a nutshell. The GOP does not want a well educated populace. The less-informed, the easier for them to take control. That is why they want to dismantle public education.
Betsy: the republicans do not want government to have responsibility for the people. They have been very consistent in that regard. They want to return us to the golden ($$$) pre-Roosevelt age of monopolies, seniors eating cat food, workers who are dependent on keeping their low-paid jobs just to have crappy health insurance, legalized misogyny and racism, single moms who can’t work because they can’t afford childcare (oops, that’s still true), etc. This is one of their most successful tools in keeping “We The Peons” angry but accepting of their oligarchs’ terms.
"A federal government that works for the people against the greed of corporations."
The Founders were aware of how pernicious unrestrained, government insinuated corporations could be. The British East India Company. It was their tea that got dumped in Boston Harbor.
Republicans? They sell out the common weal, and they sell out posterity, so long as they can maximize their own power.
Great example JL. They were one of the first Common Stock companies and even had their own private armies. That's how some mothers feel as they try to feed their families these days. Who do they blame: the gov'mnt! Who is to blame: The State governments, the greedcorporations...and when will the Feds do something about it. In California, homemakers are facing 30-40% price increases in the food stores. C'mon.
Finally tonight some light on climate change which will affect food prices more and more. We are too far from farmers. Support Jon Tester, the only farmer in the Senate.
Here're more specifics for you, Michael, on how "they work against the people's interests."
In this case, it's how the billionaire classes have financialized all U.S. higher ed.
We know, following what ALEC did (1974 on), following the Powell memo (1971 on) that all those far-right foundations first attacked American education before moving on to off-shore all those tens of millions of working-class jobs and to commodify all U.S. life.
Easiest first moves were (ALEC) to coordinate all U.S. state legislatures in reducing state funding for higher ed. Students had to go to the banks to pay for the inevitably, more-than-exponentially rising tuition. But the tuition then began rising in multiples.
Why? Colleges and universities set themselves into the new games of branding themselves and literally capitalizing on all that branding. Nothing to do with education -- in fact teaching quality suffered by the killing of tenure. Suffered even more by the ways all set themselves in neutered ("professional"-feigning) silos, most all deliberately isolated from each other.
This video does not go into what the Powell memo's wider, deadlier stratagems were. Does not touch on the parallel predations of standardized testing dehumanizing K-12. But for its look at how U.S. higher ed financialized itself for the nihilist rich, priceless:
And a lot of university teaching is done by inexperienced PhD candidates. A prominent scientist in my acquaintance complains that his colleagues speak of teaching as "loads" and research as "opportunities".
More than should be, that much is for certain. My wife was a GTF (Graduate Teaching Fellow) her first year in her Ph.D program. She taught a summer class that had never been taught before, and she had to create the entire class. (She subsequently found other ways to "participate"). I've known at least a dozen GTF's in the music program at the same university over the last 15 years, most of them as on-field directors of the marching band, or as providing lessons to undergrads. At least both of those prepare musicians who go into education in some way, shape, or form.
I agree with the Finns, Emily, who got rid of standardized testing.
If you understand the mentality of our billionaires, you'll see the true nature of how their testing denatures, dehumanizes, turns life to numbers, units, packages -- turns life into the nihilism by which our billionaires have corrupted most institutions.
Phil, I'm not sure Emily meant "standardized testing." I agree with what you say about them. But tests designed by the teachers are good ways to see if what is being taught is being understood. It also helps the teacher figure out better ways to test students' knowledge. I speak from experience as a teacher (though admittedly on the university level). I preferred using essay questions, but was told by my superior that I had to develop a multiple choice test. Doing so was educational for me, as I saw how easily words and phrases can be misinterpreted. It took 5 years to basically "test the test" to come up with the fairest version, because I took the time to see how my students were answering. If many kept getting the same question wrong by answering in a similar way, I knew it was my problem, not theirs, and I had to take that into consideration and figure out a better way to ask that question. Every teacher has to wrestle with how to figure out whether students are learning or not. So, no, testing is not necessarily a "bad thing." I still prefer reading answers to essay questions, however. It takes more time but truly gives a better concept of how much the student has learned and how well the student can communicate and think through concepts. I realize this may be impractical for lower grades in public school, though in my high school education in NJ, many of our tests had essay questions.
When the Finns kicked out the standardized testers, and put emphasis on hiring only the best teachers, the teachers then solved these problems among them.
How else can students express themselves than with essay questions? What else encourages them to think if not writing essays? What else is education if not the liberal arts?
Thank you, Phil Balla. Lewis Powell was another “I am better than…” Republican. As a guest at his dinner table, invited by his wife and daughter, I got a taste of that.
I was stationed at South Post, Ft. Myer from November 1969 to November '70 (learning Viet all that year) and on our last day, year-end exams, I took a round-about way to the exam site, stopping off at the Supreme Court. Just to see the building, several of whose justices I'd long admired, been reading.
Turned out they were in session, and the guard motioned for me please to come forward, have a look
Hugo Black. William O, Douglas. Thurgood Marshall. There they were.
A year later and our friend, Lewis P. got his reward for so advancing U.S. commercial vulgarity.
Let's hope Clarence and his fellow taker of bribes, flyer of the flags of insurrection, don't insist on keeping their corrupt tenure, even if Dems have landslide this Nov.
Wow, that was a great video! The guy behind Second Thoughts is pretty darned talented and knowledgeable. I always knew tuition was going to other places besides professor salaries.
So many good, decent Americans. Here on Heather's site. Associated with our many, good, various Dems at all levels. All kinds of guests on late-night, stand-up shows.
Good to know, too, you could access it. Another person here earlier could not.
I just searched for it as you said. The link didn't work. I've subscribed to Second Thought for $5 per month on Patreon. In addition to his videos, you get access to his Discord server. I look forward to conversations with younger folks (I'm 50 and the median age here on Heather's newsletter is well above 50!) about where we need to go from here on out.
Second Thought is a socialist, and I think those USians leaning left should embrace the path forward paved by social democracies such as in Scandinavia.
I live a block away from a very well-regarded college. I see (and hear) daily where a lot of their money goes. They have bought all but four homes (including mine) on both sides of my block (for undisclosed future uses), and they are replacing all their concrete sidewalks with fancy, expensive composite bricks. Yet they frequently ask me to include them in my will (LOL)
Eu Vey. I just opened the Bloomberg News and KH is already ahead of me. So, I should really erase this Post, but I will leave it for 'Post'erity.
Here's my message to VP Harris this morning before I read the Prof. We are in this together: Dear Madam Vice President;
The campaign is missing an important element of our "future". Food Prices must come down. I have spoken with several female Trumpers and they say it is one of their big issues. Especially in California, where there are no anti profiteering regulations (other than in emergencies). Food companies are gouging consumers and piling the ill gotten profits back into share buybacks. This lack of consumer protection Federally and in many States needs to stop, and adds a new message to your campaign.
“Food prices are sticky – they either don’t come down, or they’ll come down just a little bit,” said Angela Huffman, president of the consumer advocacy non-profit Farm Action. “Companies are setting a new normal.”
The companies’ net profits are up by a median of 51% since just prior to the pandemic, and in one case as much as 950%.
In the last two years specifically, since inflation peaked and started slowing, restaurants have generally recorded the highest profit increases among food companies – a median of 72%.”
And I have to add, the market concentration in the food manufacturing industry is insane. I just read that Mars, Inc., one of the largest conglomerates, plans to acquire the company behind such brands as Pringles and Eggo... for $36 billion.
I don't know if your data is accurate (I assume it is) but the buying public knew of the consumer rape that was underway long before it was reported. Business executives and their Board members couldn't believe how easy it has been to extract bountiful profits at the hands of the 'unsuspecting' but hungry buying public! Blame the Administration rather than the purchaser of the next Chris Craft speedboat!
I've most noticed inflation at my local grocery store (pretty high end I admit, Kowalskis here in Minneapolis) regarding steak prices. There are many selling for $40 per pound! But we should all be willing to substitute for this, eat less meat, etc. It is only steak at Kowalskis that is completely out of control. But salmon has also gone up.
Isn't Kowalski's a locally owned company, not one of the corporate giants? If so, challenging their profit margin might be a Twin Cities matter. A local challenge might be inspirational in the larger fight to bring grocery prices down.
Bruce, my comment was in no way a reflection on the consumer and the pressures they face to purchase foodstuffs. It was only to reflect on the producers and the sellers and how they are taking advantage of us by inordinate inflation of their products. No one should denigrate them from making an honest profit.
I agree with your text, but do these female Trumpers believe he will deal with these corporations better? If so, they really have their heads in the sand. That's just absurd!!! Vote Blue!!!
JL - I think they may be focusing on making sure women (well, White women) are fulfilling their responsibilities as breeders for the future exploited workers of the world!
And yet many of those people who benefit most from government programs turn to MAGA. There is a terrible lack of education underpinning the Republican Party and one of the first cuts made in Republican controlled states is to public education. They know their constituency well. The oligarchs may support MAGA financially, but they don’t have enough votes among themselves to elect Trump. They do know how to reach the sorry lot who would vote against their own self interests.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted that the change “underscores the fact that the number of children living in poverty is a policy choice.” They are working against the children's interest as well.
What we're dealing with in terms of everyday Republicans are people who are being spoon-fed lies. It is impossible to have any kind of rational discussion with them. It's the same old song begun my Reagan and expanded by Trump: it's the immigrants, coming in, soaking up benefits, voting illegally, and the like. There is no proof for their claims. The greedy are not the billionaires but rather the welfare queens and the immigrants.
It is mind boggling the depths to which these “people” descend. We have to be on guard constantly. Then they accuse others..very self righteously.. of the very things they are doing themselves. Pretty sick.
That reflects my 35 years spent with my agency, and knowledge of other local agencies. It has gotten so much worse since 2008, when the bandages got ripped off the scab of racism and it began to run free.
Given what you’ve told us about them, Ally, I doubt they were persuadable anyway. They’re just looking for something that doesn’t look racist and misogynistic to justify supporting Trump. Which they were going to do anyway.
I think your assessment is accurate. I just jousted with a couple veteran friends (both former trainees of mine) who see no difference in their perception of Tim Walz's "lies about his rank" and the lies spouted by fpotus.
It's because MAGAt's are in a bubble, where they hear only what the bubble lets through. My "feelers" tell me that they are getting really nervous and defensive these days though.
Figures that President Biden is fighting price gouging by the corporate rich.
And also that Republicans defend their brethren rich corporate predators.
Figures, too, that President Biden and Dems in Congress are trying to do something to spur housing construction for America's working classes -- and in parallel to that how Senate Republicans want to stop "big guvmint" from helping the abandoned tens of millions who truly need help.
Our billionaire classes will ever invest in luxury housing only. Cannot imagine any helping hands except to the corrupt in Congress and on the even-more-corrupt Clarence court who see government as only subsidizers, rationalizers for the billionaire classes.
So much in Heather's today on the good efforts by Biden, Harris, good Dems abroad the land. So why is it predictable, too, that the orange felon and his cult crew in reply can only issue insult, invective, and lies? Have the rich so poisoned themselves and all their bribed-in-high-places that they can treat the democracy they hate only as their orange felon, their Long Dong Clarence, and the rest of their stooges do?
The imperative to maximize profit uber alles incentivizes sociopathy.. Traditionally it's not money as such that is evil; it's money as an exclusive and overriding focus.
NPR’s Fresh Air with Dave Davies has a directly and chillingly relevant piece today on the scope and effect of lobbying on American government by a wide range of domestic and foreign interests.
One particularly pernicious gambit is to use lobbying, a constitutionally protected activity to petition the government to redress grievances, as a way to launder enormous sums of money from despicable, brutal autocratic regimes, which cannot directly contribute to congress members. Instead they give millions to American lobbyists who will then act as cut outs and simply pass on the money to American politicians, fooling no one as to where the funds are from, a tactic for which Paul Manafort was convicted, and then pardoned by Trump.
Casey Michel shines a light on Americans lobbying for foreign governments in Washington, in many cases representing brutally repressive regimes and countries that oppose U.S. interests. Laws requiring registration of lobbyists and disclosure of their efforts have been little-enforced, and thus ignored by countless agents who've reaped huge profits from their work. Michel's new book is Foreign Agents.
I have read repeatedly in the MSM that popular public initiatives are "blocked by the (insert wealthy interest here) lobby like it's a law of nature that cannot be overcome. I have read that laws written by "powerful lobbies" are passed by Congress nearly verbatim. Isn't that a T-rex i the room? Like a form of organized crime inserting itself between the public and "our" representatives, and little is done about it? Is that the government we were promised in school? Or something broken?
Thanks to Biden and Harris/Waltz for seeking alternatives. Trump, on the other had can't wait to cut the taxes of the very wealthy yet again.
Well there has been almost NO legislation passed in the past two years of any kind let alone pro lobby legislation, as the current House is totally dysfunctional and couldn't pass a bill to pay for ice cream these days due to Mike Johnson and the maga constituency. So I doubt there is any current legislation that would meet your accusation.
Interestingly most of that cookie cutter legislation I’m reading about is targeted towards state legislatures. There’s been reporting that the more powerful lobbies’ suggested legislation is being passed verbatim by those legislatures.
Go Asheville, North Carolina for demanding payment for the city’s expenses, prior to allowing trump to speak at his rally!!!
Albuquerque still hasn’t received a penny of almost a half million dollars for his rally in Rio Rancho. His plane landed in Albuquerque, ABQ police escorted his motorcade to Rio Rancho, back to ABQ to spend the night in a downtown hotel, and to the airport in the morning. The expenses escalated because he insisted that the high rise city hall and county buildings were adjacent to the hotel he picked. So both high rises had to be vacant while he was here, meaning hundreds of employees had to be given two paid days off.
Observation; if this orange clown stiffs your city for $100,000s of unpaid bills and you still vote for him, you are an idiot who deserves the other self-defeating choices in your life!
Our local news this morning had a story about how many cities were stiffed by the Trump campaign in 2016. Pittsfield, MA has sent a bill to the Harris-Walz campaign for the reimbursement of costs associated with a recent rally there, but the amount is nothing compared to the bills that Trump has racked up. (Just to clarify: I am not implying that the amount is nothing to the City of Pittsfield!)
While your narrative is enlightening and, sadly, valid, it is important to recognize how severely the "neoliberal"-free-market-fundamentalism-anti-government policies of both political parties over the past 40 years have sapped (stolen) resources from all levels of government as well as all families earning below the top 1% of incomes. This has diverted reasonable tax government income, preventing investment in basic equitable programs such as public education, infrastructure maintenance, child care, etc. Thus huge amounts of resources are diverted to the personal pockets of the extremely wealthy. Take food costs, for instance. This is a basic kitchen table issue. They are high and burdensome, even after the control of inflation and the overall national increase in wages, because of the unrestrained oligopolistic concentration of all sectors of the food chain (with 4 or less corporations controlling over 60% of the most sectors of the food chain from farming to processing to retail groceries). This is a setup for price gauging and excess profits. This does not get enough publicity. It also seems the policies of Republicans, before, and especially after Trump, want to make this situation worse for ordinary people.
Yes, definitely "both political parties".... I must admit I'm looking forward to the next 3.5 years of silence about "both sides" until it becomes convenient again.
I would like to see you devote a newsletter to the history and evolution of the US press. Technology has radically changed the distribution of information in society. When print newspaper were the main method publishers controlled content and thereby influenced public opinion. Owners of broadcast TV and famous news outlets seem to believe they still have the power to manipulate voters/control public opinion. But their power is shrinking due to newer independent web-based news outlets & social media.
Roseanne Barr was among the first to realize she could bypass the press while running for President using twitter. Trump piggybacked on that idea. Trump also perfected the art of refusing reporter access unless they met his criteria (no fact-checking, no hard questions).
The famous news outlets (NYT, WaPo, etc.) are so drunk with their own perceived power they spin/distort news to serve their own agendas and biases with impunity.
Harris seems to be asserting her own power to ignore unreasonable/unfair reporters but still get her message out by talking directly to the public, in person or on twitter. Good for her.
The US press a big, important subject and I would like to hear your thoughts.
Subscriptions should be as easy to cancel as they are to start.
These nuisance non-services especially hurt people with multiple responsibilities who don’t have time to stay on hold for 15 minutes. Credit card companies unsurprisingly side with the subscription providers. This is the perfect place for consumer protection laws.
We regulate highways. We regulate building codes and land use. Why the hell not regulate commerce to avoid people getting hurt? Mandate a reasonably "square deal"? You get to go pretty much wherever you want on our nations highways, but not at excessive speeds and though red lights at intersections.
Many years ago someone from corporate Black and Decker told my father that only a small percentage of people who buy items at ostensibly reduced prices with rebates actually collect them. Rebates became much harder to collect (much reduced deadlines) since then) although it now seems to me that the whole practice is becoming less popular of late.
Among Biden's many better-known accomplishments are $35 maximum monthly insulin expenses for seniors -- but the convicted felon who is, like, really smart because his uncle went to MIT, said today that it was actually himself who did that.
Unfortunately, I have personal experience which compels me to agree with you completely und unequivocally, JL. It makes me want to cry for my grandchildren who have no choice in the bubble they are growing up in.
"The Biden-Harris administration has changed the orientation of the United States government from relying on markets to order society and protecting the interests of wealthy Americans in the expectation that they would invest in the economy more efficiently than they could if the government interfered by protecting workers and consumers. Biden and Harris, along with the cabinet officers and staff of the executive branch, revived an older ideology calling for the government to promote the interests of the American people as a whole."
Over and over I have heard politicians and economics commentators cite that "efficiency" as a justification to withhold policy. Efficiency can be a very good thing, but only when you ask efficiency of what? Nazis were efficiently genocidal. When I look at what Republicans talk about I primarily see great efficiency in hoovering money from the general public into the pockets of the 1%.
Thank you, Heather, for the breakdown before we all have a breakdown over MSM never reporting anything positive about Joe and Kamala! Don’t really know how they can call themselves journalists when their reports are so skewed. They are like tourists at a zoo…feeding the messengers. Shameful people.
I used to look up to the press but not anymore. They only give Joe Biden and his administration a bad time for working hard for the American people and democracy. I’m not having it.
Arrrggghhh! First stop reading "the press" and then criticize it even though you don't read it anymore for not reporting what you want to hear!!! Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
I apologize I am not trying to punch down anyone here, I have subscribed to Heather's newsletter for several years and I may get chased out for being so angry about the insane attacks on the press which has a hard job to do and at least the NY Times does it better than most. But we need that press, because while the few here are a choir preaching to each other, you need to realize how important the press is to getting the word out to the vast majority of people who don't read Heather's stack. We are a small minority here and while the press isn't perfect it's easy better than no press at all.
Jon, I believe many of us would have a different opinion of the press and mainstream media if they were once again held to the standards of the Fairness Doctrine that was extinguished by Reagan and Murdoch for their own political agenda. We do need a fair and free press who share facts, not opinions as fact. Truth matters.
You need to learn something accurate about history my friend. Newspapers were NEVER held to the Fairness Doctrine which only applies to TELEVISION and RADIO (ie licensed media... newspapers have never been licensed). So even by quoting the fairness doctrine while we are discussing the new york times shows a lack of knowledge about how journalism works.
Thank you, Heather. I am so so tired of The New York Times continuing to bash President Biden and now VP Harris. Writing to the paper voicing my dismay at their bias has done nothing to stop it.
I canceled my subscription long ago.
NYT= NEW YORK TROLLS.
I cancelled years ago... after reading the paper for decades. I recall the foul looks I once got when I carried around a copy in the Deep South. It might as well have been Pravda.
Yet the strange thing is that it's a curate's egg -- "good in parts" -- so the stink from journalistic incompetence by design wafts its way round the world, while some excellent ed-op and other material still gets published.
Selling mixed prejudices, because prejudices sell. Tarting up the old lady sells... News, apparently, doesn't... I find that hard to believe.
Readers aren't all junkies. Once upon a time, journalists weren't all pushers, weren't all hacks...
Undermining trust, rotting the bonds of community, cannot possibly work for long. Fast bucks can make for lasting failure. That of a great newspaper, that of a once great and immensely promising country.
If it was Pravda today, you would be cheered by the MAGA crowd of republicans.
lol...
First, consider that you are emulating the thinking of Trump: "a great newspaper, that of a once great and immensely promising country." And, then consider, that the NYT that has enhanced our appreciation of the world for many decades, requires our vigilance and confronting feedback for us to be responsible and effective. This issue (responsibility and vigilance) prevails as citizens of the world we live in, and as parents, friends, students.
Obviously, consider it lazy to simply abandon what we find fault with.
P.S. I continue to benefit greatly from attending to Tom Friedman's wisdom.
Interesting take on it. My take is that the New York Times' irresponsible reporting and editing helped get Trump elected in 2016. I dropped my subscription shortly thereafter. They don't seem to have learned anything since. It is not a democratic institution that can be influenced by our "feedback."
Susanna, I don't think it was just NYT. I noticed most of the media I had previously depended on prior to 2015, going nuts for the jerk who had no experience, no empathy, no civility, little intelligence beyond that of the con artist. He was the "new thing" and our decent media in large numbers jumped on board the Trump train all the way to Trumplandia. We are still recovering from the trip and that fool wants in again and has a whole lot of media support. Any criticism of Trump seems muted and tentative while criticism of Biden who has actually done a whole lot for this nation is loud, rude, and undeserved. How do we hold the media accountable. I pointed out a really bad pro-Trump but inaccurate item on NPR recently and only got back a standard "thank you for your comment; we'll get back to you on it." They never will. I did actually hear one criticism of Trump today on NPR, tentative, honest, and there! Shock!
Ruth, I *know* it wasn't just the NYT, but their email obsession was pretty relentless.
Boy what rubes are you folks. "Whole lot of media support"? REALLY? Except for Fox (which of course is highly influential), SHOW me the "support" Trump has. The Times CALLED FOR HIM TO STEP ASIDE (which for me is a disaster, because we - the Democrats - will win SO MUCH MORE EASILY against Trump precisely because he is a disaster than we would against Nikki Halley or heaven forbid even Vance.). Again, as with the slanted media I have requessted, do not give my your opinions, those are worth about as much as MY opinions, GIVE ME FACTUAL REFERENCES to articles which are slanted. And by slanted I don't mean negative. It is the responsibility of the press to report the news whether good, bad or neutral. The negative reporting surrounding Biden should have been expected, he has shown repeatedly over many months a declining ability to focus and speak clearly. They should have been exposing that all along. And if anything, it might (if you take a few seconds to think) be the best thing that the press ever could have done (to get Biden to step aside) because he would have LOST THE ELECTION TO TRUMP ALMOST WITHOUT QUESTION and now with Harris firmly in the role of nominee, we actually have the chance to have the second black President and the first woman. HUGELY GOOD for the country. Trump is not. So I fail to see why you keep attacking ME when all I have asked for is proof (that you all claim you have read) of the so-called one-sidedness of the press, favoring Trump. I don't mean vague hand-waving, I mean what you do for research, i.e., you write down the articles and dates and page numbers and quote the sections. You do that and I promise you I will read every single line referenced and if I think you have a case, I also promise you I will mea culpa to the entire blog.
The problem is, I think there is no "there" there, i.e., the so-called articles you all claim are biased simply don't exist. You take a headline, misread it or interrpret it in the wrong way and then say "there's proof that the article is biased" except when you read it, there is no bias.
Again, prove me wrong. I don't think you can.
The TIMES reporting helped to get Trump elected? ARE YOU FROM MARS?!!! The Times avidly supported Hillary Clinton, but hey, you know, Hillary had some REAL baggage and the Times NEWS section (unlike the Editorial section) was obligated to report on that stuff. That was Hilary's burden to bear, she was the one who did stuff that looked at best fishy and are worst UGLY, and sadly, she was facing in the election the worst monster we have ever seen. But the newspaper's responsibility it to report the truth and they did. Sadly, the people in this country are as a group way to dumb to actually tease out the bad stuff from the good stuff and she lost, not by much either. She won the popular vote and only lost in the swing states which Biden turned around 4 years later.
Hilary was her own best enemy, for so so so many reasons and while I avidly supported her like a good Democrat, I was not stunned by her loss because I knew she was vulnerable. Trump's team was able to jump on it and divert attention away from his own nonsense (with one major difference... all of HIS stuff was "private" nonsense, while her stuff occurred while she was in service to the government and that made a HUGE difference).
I believe that Trump's grotesque moves WHILE he was President will as they did in 2020, hold as major negatives against him in 2024, especially now that Biden is out of the race. Those issues are/were just as relevant as the issues regarding Hilary in 2016, and Kamala Harris has few if any similar issues. She has been one of the most upstanding public servants in a long time, and I will be stunned if she loses this election.
There are actual stats out there on the number of articles the NYT put out that referenced HRC in a negative way, especially about her 'emails'. Many more of those than negatives about Trump.
Unfortunately I don't have those stats on hand, but people out there have crunched the actual numbers.
That, Valerie Meluskey, is why I took this paper for decades.
And why I look forward to victory, recovery, return to all that is admirable in America.
While expecting a hard fight and a very different world, if we all make it safely to 2026.
I agree with these productive talks. I long ago grasped the ‘understanding the audience’ reporting but ….
that the fight is going to be ongoing ..even after the Harris/Walz Win ..is a given. Our factual gains make little dent but good writing/reporting/headlines does. And I would agree the Republicans cornered the headlines with THE GRIFTER, THE CON hype using drama and a popular seduction , if not even cult approach. It worked …PAST TENSE.
Enough have now come back/seen the light , the eloquence of dedicated writers,historians,and amazing leadership has prevailed , mightily preserved, I favor.
The fight is not over.
We can never be complacent again.
Hopefully that lesson has received the A+ , TBD on 11/5/24 .
It requires a LANDSLIDE.
It requires GOTV/Volunteers amassing/Postcards/All hands on Deck! The grassroots led the charge , the American Rally Forth The Flag miracles is working.
Stay The Course 🫵
I love the ‘’write it that way’’ closing answer line…BIDEN’s answer! Bravo my captain 🫶
The writing is clearly on the wall. Newspaper are JUST beginning to correct their lack of equal coverage..in part due too -to the new joy/hope/charisma that sells sells sells…we have a L O N G way to go before equality and facts surpass love of money and control . Few making the big bucks will like the road…and those who contribute a THANK YOU EVERY TIME!
It’s perfectly clear to those with real leadership abilities …
💙💙VOTE BLUE , END THIS COUP💙💙
👍
“O Captain! my Captain! rise up and hear the bells; ...”
Biden made a huge mistake with the border if for no reason then the optics of do nothing. I cringed for 3 years wondering why he was so dense. Maybe it’s because he is dense.
Hopefully minus 1.
And we all benefitted from their endless, baseless attacks on Hillary Clinton in 2016, "But her emails," /s. And here we are the old playbook being recycled.
If you really believe that ALL the attacks on Hillary Clinton were baseless, you need to read some real history. Hillary was so vulnerable from many of her positions as both Senator and Secretary of State. She was a terribly weak candidate (I was so stunned when Biden decided to step aside for her, even though voting for a woman was something I was really anxious to do, I just wasn't convinced she was the right one).
John, so you were looking for perfect, huh. Clinton was a very qualified candidate, knew her stuff, and was far superior in every way to "the monster" as you call Trump. I did not see the NYT pushing nearly as hard to point out Trump's total inappropriateness for any office let alone president, then he proved it. There are plenty of folks saying your exact criticisms of Harris right now. Could it be, dare I say it, Misogyny or a fear of women in power? Nah, couldn't be that!
Ah you mentioned Tom Friedman. That ain’t fair. Yes there are some roses among the thorns
I also cancelled years ago. I think the NYTimes helped Trump in 201-. What a shame.
2016
There is a problem with the NYT and reporting on the Israeli genocide in Gaza. Israeli relies on the "Israel Lobby" to control reactions. The head of the NYT is of a Jewish family that owned the paper for many years. I checked to see who the major shareholders are. It is Vanguard and Black Rock with controlling interest. They want profit, not controversy. V and BR have controlling interest in many important companies. One is Boeing. Boeing has put profit and share price ahead of engineering and safety. This country has a problem of profit over best practice.
"This country has a problem of profit over best practice." For far longer and wider than you even suspect Patrick.
If you don't like the New York Times, try CONSORTIUM NEWS. There you won't get a defense of US foreign policy, in Gaza, Ukraine, or anywhere else. It's full of former Peabody winners who've soured on the mainstream media and gone alternative. Scolding inevitably, and little appreciative of the difficulties of being the world's hegemonic power, - but throwing our many failures and atrocities into sharp relief. Give it a try.
I think I will cancel mine now even though I only pay $4 per month. I always refuse the full rate.
I finally canceled at my son's urging. I, too, only paid $4 and enjoyed the games and recipes.
But we must speak with our pocketbooks and not give them another penny. I've had it with them, just as I've had it with Xitter. No more.
Good luck with that. Be ignorant by choice. The Times is by far the best, most objective news source going these days. If you choose to get your "news" from MSNBC or CNN or some blog (like this one) then you are closing yourself off to actual facts and you will suffer for it, as will our entire country, if enough people turn out to be like you.
Wow, what a world we live in today. "I'd rather trust some unknown person writing a blog and their fans than an actual newspaper that has standards." Amazing.
Maybe I'm fortunate to read in several languages. But, for starters, someone here mentioned both The Guardian and the English language version of Haaretz...
Some big problems with NYT since 2016...
"Letters from an American" is not "some unknown person writing a blog." Neither are the offerings from Timothy Snyder, Dan Rather, Joyce Vance, Simon Rosenberg, George Lakoff, Robert Reich, Bill Kristol, and The Intercept.
I trust their integrity a lot more than I trust the NYTimes or WSJ at present.
Agree ml.
Except NONE of those report news objectively, they provide opinions. People need to differentiate, opinions and news are NOT the same thing. Sigh...
And I never put the WSJ in the same class as the Times. WSJ was purchased by the Murdochs and it has never been the same since. The Times is still owned by the Ochs/Salzburger family (as it has been for almost 120 years) and has steadfastly REFUSED to become fodder for the sell-out crowd.
And if you can't trust the Times, you (and the rest of us) are in a world of hurt, my friend, that has NOTHING AT ALL to do with Trump.
But..... I still subscribe because out of their political reportage (which I agree is in need of a make-over), you do get pretty good coverage of world news, sports, and business. And, of course, Metropolitan Diary.
Which is why I will likely keep it for now. But I wouldn’t pay full rate. Every time my annual special ends, I threaten to terminate and they extend it another year. Hope your not paying full rates.
I was begged by the NYT to only pay $4 to get me back. I couldn’t pay for deliberate misinformation. Felt unpatriotic
Can you please provide even ONE SINGLE EXAMPLE of "deliberate misinformation"??? Maybe you can, I am sure it has happened, but you will need to do a VERY diligent search because from where I sit (and I read the paper religiously every single day, cover to cover) because the number of times that has happened over many years has got to be single digits if that.
And I am talking about NEWS, not columns or editorials. Those are always subject to points of view and can clearly contain infomation that is not vetted adequately. That should NOT be the case with actual hard news, which the Times has extremely rigorous policies on checking and double-checking. And when they are wrong, they own up pretty much instantly.
I cancelled my long term subscription with a note why a few years ago and just picked it back up for 4$ a month. I will cancel after trial. I like to read all the reporting during election season.
At the end of trial, if you threaten to end they will extend the special another year with no strings. So I give them $50 a year and I do receive good international and national news.
Hmmm so you DO admit that you receive good national news. Politics is national news. So how do you distinguish the "good" national reporting from the "awful" political reporting? Its all pretty much the same, and from where I sit, I can't even tell the difference.
Me too. They sicken me along with WaPo. Each journalist staying with them sickens me too. I am looking at the Tech Bros and the money they can throw at this election and it is frightening. How did we let them get so powerful? I see them as an evil that we need to revolt against. Not that the other super wealthy throwing money at this election are any more tasteful. It is just so wrong that we have all of the billionaires who are heading onto trillionairehood at some point.
I did the same. What’s interesting, though, is how many of these so-called journalists lie in the paper but write books denigrating Trump.
Again as I have asked repeatedly, could you present even a SINGLE ARTICLE in which you claim a reporter (not a columnist but an actual reporter, like Maggie Haberman or Peter Baken) has lied in the Times? I challenge this because it is a vile accusation and if true would mean my entire belief system is screwed up. But sorry, I don't think it is. I think you are screwed up here, charging things that simply aren't true and if that is it, you should be ashamed of yourself.
I’m close to canceling my WaPo subscription next.
I cancelled it when they banned me for commenting what I would do when Trump was laid in state at the capital and said I would crap in front of cameras on the steps of the Capital. (An assume statement to make for the world to view, isn’t it.) And they refused to lift the ban. So they lost big time with my special sale rate ya ya.
Hahaha!! Bill Katz
But I will definitely urinate at his chosen grave site or toss cat shit from a distance if necessary. And I have 7 cats to choose from having a ready supply.
So typical of people who obscure the truth and throw "stones". As they say, you shouldn't live in a glass house, then. The use of foul language is just one clear example of your bias, so you can hardly accuse others of bias yourself.
Bill, perhaps the chosen site will be next to Ivana at Bedminster….a fitting location, no?
Same here. It runs out in November -- nice coincidence. I've been subscribing to the Guardian, both UK and US digital editions, for several years, and just picked up Haaretz to follow Israel-Palestine news.
Haaretz is such an opinionated paper LOL! To give up the times and choose that left-wing rag is nonsensical. Don't get me wrong, I am FAR left wing especially when it comes to Israel (can't stand Netanyahu and believe they need to withdraw from Gaza and give that land to the Palestinians, oh yes and I am Jewish too) but to quote Haaretz while denigrating the NY Times is the height of absurdity.
Same--I switched to "puzzles only," and my resting heart rate has improved!
Well, maybe (and I am happy for your heart) but you have also dumbed down your brain, because you are ignoring the best source of unbiased news available in this country. Wow, what a move forward that must be. Now you can rely on blogs and podcasts by people who have NOTHING but their own axes to grind and aren't held to ANY standards at all! Bravo!
I too cancelled my subscription and told them I was tired of their biased reporting.
Please provide a SINGLE EXAMPLE of their "biased reporting". IE, this means NEWS articles, not editorials or columnists, please. Those are going to have biases (and they should).
My guess is that you couldn't pick a biased article out if you fell over it. Because in fact there simply aren't many, probably not more than a few a month if that. THE NY TIMES is one of the most objective papers in the world and thats why it is also the BIGGEST paper in the world because people who count use it consistently.
I did mine last weekend.
Gigi , Me too.
I am not happy with a lot of their reporting but I keep my subscription to support their investigative work.
Please distinguish... all of their reporting is in some sense investigative work. And if you feel that there is a bias in their reporting, I would LOVE for YOU to be the one to point out an actual article where this can be shown. I am sure there are some, but you and everyone else here seems to suggest that occurs in virtually every story and that simply is such nonsense. Sigh...
Bless you.
And they wonder why Harris’ strategists don’t have her doing press conferences. 🤦♀️
I have been saying she needs to stick to her winning formula of going directly to the people and then rebutting Trump's and others' lies on social media.
Our donations are funding her rallies and I am absolutely ok with that.
Next the media will chime in with, "Harris refuses to do press conferences. WHAT IS SHE HIDING???"
They have been doing that, and Harris and Walz have wisely ignored them. I am saying that if the MSM is not supporting democracy, which they clearly are not, then what use are they? I feel none. I go to better sources for information. If we stop 1) subscribing for money, 2) stop consuming, they will have contributed to their own demise. Harris and Walz are going to the voters, and clearly that is the best use of their time.
They answer questions every day. "not doing press conferences" is bullshit spread as fact.
When Trump refuses to answer when questioned should be headline news. What about Egyptgate?
They do answer questions and lay out their policies and if the press is too lazy to figure it out without a one-on-one that they can brag about and market for days, and then totally bomb as they have been doing, and then blame it on Harris, and start gathering reasons to not believe in a capable woman than what have they, then too bad for them. And, while many may not notice, it seems the readership here is noticing that MSM does not have the same standards for Donald Trump. I don't care if their families are threatened if they ask him things he does not want to hear, then either their publications should back them, or they should find another line of work.
Maybe the outcome of something that has gone wrong in America -- living to work, not working to live.
And doing everything "aggressively", so that work becomes like war (except that everyone would be dead under this kind of management in a real war) and workers end up with combat fatigue because of management behaving like the enemy...
One consequence: people work till they drop... and those who can retire at 60 get the hell out despite, in many cases, being fit in mind and body for years to come...
In a hard-working but workaholism-free society, people might be willing to stay on for longer and help train young recruits...
Thank you Linda; after MSM's 2016 presidential reporting debacle I follow individual reporters (even books) on specific topics & digital authors only.
With Dems in Chicago shortly, MSM will distort history itself, searing 1968 political history. This coming week, I look forward to HCR's real time reports in her full historical context method.
Bryan, I totally agree with you. I am reading Project 2025 in a Democrats Abroad bookclub. I have read the Forward and 10 chapters, am starting on an 11th one. We are skipping around. I have to balance this bad prose and nastiness with some books too. I really appreciated Prof Ruth Ben-Ghiat's book Strongmen which I recently read, for its insights and history of fascism.
As a PAID subscriber, I have reading weekly preview chapters of Dr. Bandy X. Lee's new book, "The Psychology of Trump Contagion: An Existential Threat .... I just received and will read her "Epilogue" in the book later this morning.
Dr. Lee's forensic psychiatrist group has been directly involved in a campaign regarding DJT's 9/18/24 sentencing on the 34 jury determined felonies & the Defendant's ten (10) contempt convictions already decided by the Court as violations of the Court's Protective Order (PTO) to protect jurors & witnesses.
I'm reading STRONGMEN right now and am a paid subscriber to Prof. Ben-Ghiat's LUCID Substack. Highly recommended, both of them.
And Timothy Snyder has a new book coming out in Sept. Also read Autocracy, Inc by Anne Applebaum.
Me too!
HCR is a gift that keeps on giving! I am so very grateful to this tireless lady. What a sparking gem!
What "better sources"? Please provide citations for that. There are none that I can find, certainly not local (US) sources. There are some fine journalism examples elsewhere, but in the US, the NY Times is top of the list. And you, like virtually everyone else on this blog, mimics the nonsensical accusations without providing any hard evidence (or any evidence at all). Just because you SAY IT IS SO doesn't make it so.
Have a great day if you can get your head into fresh air.
Jon, you can have your opinion, but I don't agree. I think the NYT has covered this election so poorly, and continues to do so, that it outweighs anything else. One example is that the NYT called for Biden to drop out of the race based on one debate where he was under the weather and barraged with fascist propaganda, with the station doing no live fact checking nor did they shut Trump's mike off when he ranted as they had promised to do. Trump has given numerous lying ranting speeches and have we hear the same response.*****
I have had correspondence with editors from the Times that is so off base and stupid it could be like talking to a MAGA or Russian Bot. Not something I am willing to spend my time doing. I am also not White and male and so might take more offense to it then you do. I live a multinational life and since I spend more time outside of the US right now than in it I want sources that do what I need them to do, when I consume US news which because of the election I am doing more so. The NYT does not fit the bill. In fact, since I stopped subscribing to them my quality of life has gone up. ******
I get the AP each day. While I do not always like their slant, I don't pay them money for their opinions. I get the Guardian. I donate to them, they are independent news. I read both the US and the European editions. I also get Foreign Affairs, the Carnegie Foundation for Peace, Substacks from people like Heather Cox Richardson, Timothy Snyder, Ruth Ben-Ghiat, and other people who also write books. I still get news from my US city, and neighborhood, which give me information that is useful. I would not say that about NYT.*****
As for fresh air, while my US city does not offer much of that, my city in the EU tends to have air quality in the green zone. Also, the walls of my house are made with loam, an ancient material that insulates for temperature and sound and also absorbs toxins from the air. it is having a big revival here. My drinking water is clean from the tap too, but it is night here and I am not going out. As it is still day in the US I hope you can get to fresh air too.
Brava Linda ! So well stated. You must be so much more patient than I am though.
Yes, and Kamala ought to answer journalists’ gotcha and click-bait questions (that are so shallow and meaningless) with substantive policy answers. Let her insist on her own agenda at any pressers.
And shut it down & tell them why & walk away IF they treat her disrespectfully—recently Lawrence O’Donnell (MSNBC) had an excellent segment going ballistic over (many of) the press’s outburst-hostile-clambering style of lobbing (not asking) questions at, for example, Biden & his press secretary (as opposed to the softball manner TFFFG is questioned): https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZD-oTJ49nls
Yes he did, and it was awesome !
Today’s. L.A. Times top story is very disgustingly similar. Disappointing.
She's damned if she does, damned if she doesn't. At the moment, "she's not doing enough pressers, not talking about policy." You can bet that the minute she does, she will be ciriticized further. Why bother? Especially when the other side isn't? As Reed Galen on The Daily Beast today said, Trump is like those 90's mix tapes that just play over and over.
Remember how Trump refused to do presets in his only term? Then his press Secretary refused to also.
At that time Max, he was "training the press corp" to his liking. Yes, Kamala, Tim, and Biden need do 'somewhat' likewise... but nicer if possible.
Instead of follow the money, I would say: follow the click-bait.
Yes, but money and influence is at the bottom of it.
Any dictator would admire the uniformity and obedience of the U.S. media.
Noam Chomsky
I thought click-bait was for the money.
Bingo.
Follow the click-bait? No, Kamala should take over the pressers by providing substance of giving policy responses and ignore gotcha and click-bait questions.
Does anyone know if Harris/Walz has a nice, comprehensive website of their own where they've made all of their policy/issue positions available for public view? Whenever I go to a candidate's website, all they seem to offer are opportunities to donate money. I've long thought it odd that politicians whine about bias in the press, then ignore the most common way to bypass the press and get information directly to the public -- a well-designed website that fronts for a good database of material, including supporting links for fact-checking.
Great question Dirk; That's been on my mind also. Kudo's
I know exactly how you feel. They have sold out to whatever bidder has bought them and that’s too bad
Same family, but I think the law of diminishing returns has set in and "Dash," as he is called, has't got the acumen or the brains God gave a goose.
One begins to understand Gertrude Stein's comment, "There's no there there."
Lol Carol ! Those, coincidentally are three of my favorite wise cracks.
Nobody has bought the NY times!!! This is so ridiculous!
I dropped my NY Times subscription after 30(!) headlines in a row in a Google search, about Biden’s age following Hur’s report. And following their non-stop attacks on Biden after the debate, I have never looked back…
That's about when I dropped it. If they want to fight the Wall Street Journal and the NY Post for subscribers and more importantly advertisers -- go for it.
Natalie Burdick and others -- I'm very grateful for the comments about the NYTimes. I cancelled at the end of 2023. (Because I live in Canada, I subscribe for only digital.) WAPO is another matter, and I pay a very small monthly fee there for digital only.
With Joe Kahn as executive editor of the Tarnished Lady who has made it known that defending democracy is partisan and he won't do it, what can one expect.
To really defend democracy perhaps it is time to torpedo the New York Times and advocate for people canceling their subscriptions. The law of diminishing profits seems to be the only thing Kahn and cohorts understand. Funny the editorial board has no problem cosseting a fascist wannabe and doesn't worry about appearing partisan.
To defend democracy register more Democrats. https://www.fieldteam6.org/
If you mean by defending democracy that the NY times STOPS being a fair and unbiased news source, that is nuts! Their job is to REPORT, accurately, not "defend democracy". If you have actual evidence in dates and pages, please post them because I have their complete index at my disposal (I subscribe) and I have seen no (or at least extremely little) evidence of this bogus claim. All you critics are sounding like Trump, just making up stuff in the hours that no one questions you. You should think about that before making false criticisms or at least be ready to back up your allegations with dates and page numbers. Trust me I will look up every citation and see if you have a valid claim.
I take accusations of journalistic bias seriously having worked for a news paper in a former life and trust me if the NY times is biased in anyway its in FAVOR of democracy and our current president and not in favor of trump. But I suspect what you see is that they don't come down hard enough on trump for your satisfaction but that is just them doing the proper job of a newspaper.
Jon, they are neither reporting fairly and accurately, nor defending democracy, but while that may not be "their job" it is their role in a democracy, and if they cannot do that, then we should not be wasting our time supporting them.
I, too, am a retired journalist. Just yesterday, I posted about their extreme bias in the comments section. They're losing subscribers for a reason AND harming their own reputation. Very disappointing. Read carefully. They use deprecatory language when describing Harris Walz and laudatory language for Trump. Very disappointing, especially the decks, which erroneously used the term "rebuffed" in describing Harris.
We all read enough papers to know that the NYTimes is not reporting fairly. They have printed seven or eight times as many Trump and Republican related stories as Biden stories. I stopped the times went they relentlessly went after Biden to withdraw from the race.
Try to find a NY Times story where they call Trump on his lies. They report them as fact.
Even Maggie Haberman has towed the line when reporting on Trump and she is one of the best journalists they have.
And the WAPO is only marginally better because they have Jennifer Rubin, Catherine Rampell, Max Boot, Alexandra Petri, Dana Milbank to offset the bias of their editors.
I just don't think you're going to get a lot of support on your position here Jon -- sorry.
That's why all of us need to "take up oxygen" and make sure to get this information out there. I always re-post on all the legislators in my state and have started posting on Mike Johnson's page as well.
You just got an example in the article. I’ve seen it done by Fox for years. Take a true set of circumstances and, sure, report the facts but write it in ways that make the facts seem questionable. Or at least seem to be indicating something other than what they do. I’ve seen articles where the first two or three paragraphs are a basic synopsis, followed by the next three or four that pull in marginally relative facts and quotes that don’t necessarily correlate, but add to the storytelling in a way that makes it seem they do. I’ve seen them pick and choose quotes from people who slant the point of view of the entire article without providing equally valid quotes that would balance it out. Writing is an art; not a science. And art can tell you whatever vision of the truth the artist wants you to see. All without ever actually lying or ignoring the facts. NYT has become adept at that kind or article. It’s a shame. I used to like and respect them for refusing to dip into the fray.
That whole "a neurologist visited the White House umpteen times in the past six months; is Biden on the verge of collapse?" nonsense from just a few months ago is the best example I can think of lately. This is what Mr. Rosen above considers probative and unbiased reporting?
Granted, I'm not interested in or set up for keeping track of published articles in enough detail to get a statistically accurate view of bias and distortions, so I well recognize my vulnerability to my own millieu, biases, and prejudices. Instead, I'm just sitting by the river of information watching stuff float by, wondering if the water really smells funny or is it just me...
An accusation can be true or false. Is a criticism more like an opinion, therefore, is “false criticism” a thing?
I cancelled my subscription over a month ago. (I did keep the puzzles, however. Bad me!) Nothing the NYT has published since then has made me regret my decision.
A buddy of mine went to his public library every week and copied The NY Times crossword puzzle. He would read the paper at the library as well, but only the Sunday edition.
Thankfully, I get the Sunday NY Times crossword puzzle in my local newspaper!
How would you know if you canceled your subscription?
I don't get the monthly bill any more
What Jon Rosen means is, How would you know that 'nothing the NYT has published since then has made you regret your decision' if you've canceled your subscription.
How I know is that every Substack I read refers time to time to headlines or things they do, and my life has improved greatly lessening their aggravation to me. I do not miss it at all. In fact, I would say I am better off, because dealing with stupid editors who do not have the life experience to even understand my words as I intend is not a good use of my life. Same for WaPo. Even not doing their crosswords, for which one does not need subscription with my daughter. We are reading books and other things instead. And, reading Project 2025 in my Democrats Abroad bookclub makes me very clear why I am not supporting them. I also know my fascist history to some extent, and am not participating in supporting their propaganda.
I still check the headlines once in awhile and it still favors Trump even though Harris/Walz are far superior representatives of Democracy.
And if the NYTimes is such a great defender of democracy why have there been so few headlines on Project 2025 and it's myriad threats to democracy. Or stories tying Trump and Vance and the rest of the Republicans to Project 2025?
The truth: I don't really care, it's what came before that I objected to. Also the truth: You can still read the headlines, and many articles, even when you do not have a subscription.
I still get their emails with news summaries. I still read their headlines (which, even when they don't match the content of the story, are hideous). I occasionally get a gifted article. I can't understand defending them. The NY Times Pitchbot nails it on the head. And I used to even take the paper version of the Sunday edition, and read it cover it cover--even though I'm in Nebraska.
Just cancel your subscription.
Most of us have TC.
Wow what weird newspaper are you reading LOL? I see nothing in the NY times today that "bashes" Biden! And I see nothing in Heather's article that says this or bashes the.ny run news either! If anything for almost two weeks now their articles have been extremely favorable to Harris/ Walz.
Please please quote me dates and pages of articles but NOT columnists or editorials though, those are not relevant, I am asking for news articles which you suggest slam Biden or Harris unfairly... I suggest you can't find any. Everything i see in the news section is fact and quite clearly established by good reporting.
It's the headlines and placement of articles. Headlines about the Ashville speech should be, "Trump lies about economy." About the X "conversation, "Trump gibberish."
Exactly. Who writes the headlines?
Lately, I have been thinking about the blurred lines that arise between op-ed and the news sections of newspapers. I grew up in the era of hard copy newspapers, and those had a clear structure to them: Front Page, International, National, State/Local, Opinion, Sports, Social/Special Interest.
Most newspapers retain that structure in their e-editions but if you are clicking through from social media or reading on some newspaper apps, the lines between opinion and news get blurred.
The other trend is the click-bait headline and short summary in a social media post that people see without reading the article. These headlines create perceptions.
I would like to see more in-depth reporting on the lies that Trump states and the true horror of the impact his policies would have. But now is not the time I will be canceling subscriptions.
I agree. You have to hold your nose when seeing the political reportage - and really it's the headline writers who may not be the reporters. But outside of politics, the reportage in the NYT is worth hanging onto. And Metropolitan Diary, Wordle, Spelling Bee, thank goodness. A small price to pay
Mr. Rosen, I see that you aren't getting very many responsive answers to your requests for elaboration. As tempting as it may be to apologize for the group, because you deserve a better answer, I'll decline in favor of a more process-oriented answer. Firstly, a great many people don't distinguish very clearly between op-ed and news, a confusion heartily supported by op-ed writers who, in the best of circumstances, include verifiable facts within their articles that support their opinions/analyses. And secondly, I suspect that I'm not the only one who just doesn't keep track of news articles and trends like I expect a working journalist would. Instead, the things that create a lasting "bump" of memory are likely to tend to the outragreous and to have fuzzy attribution, and having a "sense of a trend" is more a feeling than a judgment.
I understand that my reliance on using such vague "impressions" to form my own opinions makes me more vulnerable to misinformation campaigns that drift by. On the other hand, I've got other things to do, thank God, besides obsess over the news. That's why I use as many sources as I can find to get my sense of the world and hope I'm right enough to get through the day.
I think I saw you mention that you're a professional journalist, right? May I ask, where do you get your news from, and who do you work for?
I didn't expect to get many responses because factually speaking, it will be difficult to actually find real excerpts that uphold the view that the NY Times is biased, simply because those excerpts really don't exist (or if they do, there are extremely few available). Sure, the Times makes mistakes, but it is a scrupulously even-handed piece of journalism, which to agree at least a little with the complainers, is very rare. It is one of the few major papers that provides immediate feedback on errors, in the online version right in the stories themselves and typically within a day or so after publication. They also print these retractions prominently.
I was a professional journalist but that was many lives ago LOL, in the 60s and 70s. I worked for the Tucson Daily Citizen (now defunct) and prior to that the Arizona Daily Star (still in publication). Back then our journalism was stellar. I don't think it is anymore (I still read it occasionally as while I live in San Francisco, I have many friends from high school who still live in Tucson). It was acquired by one of the major accumulators of local papers back in the 90s I believe and now it is a homogenized relic with some AP news and some local fluff pieces but very little that would pass as outstanding journalism. Sadly, that is true of most local papers today.
I get my news from a variety of sources, including obviously the New York Times, with occasional glances at the WaPo (which has gone horrendously downhill since the Bezos acquisition, sigh), the LA Times and (said with nose held between two fingers) the Wall Street Journal. I also watch MSNBC, but as I have said, it is NOT journalism, it is the left-wing version of Fox Snooze. Since the commentators on MSNBC tend to tell the truth much more than those at Fox, I find it more palatable, but again, it is almost 100% opinion, not journalism. Favorite commentators are Rachel Maddow, Chris Hayes, Alex Wagner, Stephanie Rule, Ari Melber and Nicole Wallace. I abhor Joy Reid, Lawrence O'Donnell and "Morning" Joe Scarborough, and refuse to watch them anymore. I can handle puffery, but I can't handle the constant pounding of their attitudes. I also enjoy watching Michael Steele (former RNC Chairperson who has abandoned the GOP at least for now) although the further we get away from his departure from his party, the harder line he gets and it starts to be officious, sigh. I also like Jonathan Capehart when he is on, although he also goes to far at times, IMHO.
I almost never watch Fox Snooze because it just takes too much work to listen to the drivel. I watch CNN at times, but relatively rarely. For news, it is slightly better than MSNBC, but what was once a pretty reputable television news operation has fallen on hard times, IMHO, and now is a lot more like MSNBC than it is like the NY Times. Where are you Ted Turner when we need you? (Did I REALLY say that? LOL)
I read plenty of books, particularly about politics. And of course I have been a daily reader of HCR's newsletter for over two years.
I am surprised by the emphasis on "headlines". Anyone who reads a headline and then goes on a rant about the "content" of news in papers is a freaking idiot, IMHO. Apparently that includes a LOT of people who read this blog, which again is surprising to me. Headlines are written by copy editors or a headline desk, which is designed to attract readers. It conveys a minimal amount of information, and is permitted to do so in an "attractive" (or if you prefer obnoxious LOL) manner, that is part of journalism. I remember writing stories at the Star or Citizen, waking up in the morning and looking at the paper and would be astonished at what the headline writer had done (astonished often in a bad way).
But for me, headlines were just to grab a set of eyes. If you use the headline as a benchmark for what is in the story, you are ignorant and uninformed. Read the ARTICLE, that is what the headline is there for, to draw your attention. But it does NOT have to convey much information, and it can even be somewhat deceptive without violating any real journalistic standards.
If you just stay with the headlines, then you are going to be disappointed and shocked, and you will continue to be ignorant. READ THE FREAKING ARTICLES. Then make up your mind.
As I have challenged, I would love to see ANY actual quotations from a NY Times political article that shows extreme (or even moderate) bias toward Trump. I state that it simply doesn't exist and while I might find that I am wrong on a couple or three occasions, it is NOT by any means a major problem, certainly not at the Times (although it is much more a problem nowadays at the LA Times, WaPO and certainly at the WSJ which is of course owned by the Murdochs).
I think (don't know for a fact, but it is suspicion) that people are just too lazy to actually READ things and so they figure they can get an idea by reading the headlines. Sorry folks, it is hard work to be diligent about what you want to criticize and you owe it to yourself AND to those who might listen to you to DO the work and then make u p your mind.
And anyone who STILL will say "the NY Times is biased towards Trump", at least IMHO, is just expressing their OWN bias against having to read things and finding them NOT "critical enough" because they have already taken a position and won't be open-minded enough to read and learn. That is a sorry state to be in. It is of course EXACTLY what we complain about with respect to the right-wing media and their minions, that "those people don't read anything". Sadly we have the same problem and it is, at least from my perspective, worse, because WE should know better.
With that, I am outa here. There is too much blather with very little actual content from the various talking heads on this blog and it just bores me. The number of people who "commented" on my challenge with (as you noted) nothing but vague comments and hand waving rather than actual citations is a joke and I can't waste my time anymore. If Heather wants to let this blog become just ANOTHER source of disinformation, with a hive mind that ignores facts and amplifies nonsensical opinions, that's her choice, it is after all her blog. But I pay a fee to read it and sadly I am now disillusioned that she doesn't weigh in here. Maybe she is worried about her source of income, I could understand that, but to me, this is now nothing but click-bait, just as bad (and maybe worse given how much smarter I think most of these people OUGHT to be) as the right-wing Maga propeller heads.
Have a nice day, week, month and election season. I hope there is still enough sanity in this country to elect Kamala, but judging from the idiots on BOTH sides of the political spectrum, I am not sure any of THEM deserve it.
Sigh... sigh... (double sigh!)
The headline mentioned by HCR literally insults Kamala Harris’ speech before she even gives it. How do they know it will be “ light on details?” I’ve been reading the Times for years, and believe me, they have shown editorial bias repeatedly during that time. We can go all the way back to the run-up to the Iraq war if you like, but more recent examples include their focus on Clinton’s emails and Biden’s age while never exploring the truly insane, fascistic ranting of the Republican nominee. I haven’t cancelled yet, but I no longer read the paper and I feel quite well informed without it.
Maybe they are finally getting the message.
https://open.substack.com/pub/roberthubbell/p/republicans-say-its-the-economy-stupid?r=34x82&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=email
Cancel the Times and support ProPublica instead!
If you subscribe to the NYT and WaPo, you are supporting propagandists. Their models are no longer based on reporting the news, but rather on creating controversy. They have lost all credibility.
Try writing to them and saying you are cancelling your subscription, as many of HCR's readers have done
Would someone who is tech savvy please make this exchange available to the publisher and editor of the NYT.
Most people won't drop the NYTimes until after the election. But like others here, story after story for the past 18 months by Ezra Klein and others dwelling ONLY on Biden's age and NEVER on Trump's was unforgivable.
They only care about the numbers. -- advertising dollars and total subscribers. Once either number hits their "tipping point" then maybe they will care. That's when to send the exchange.
So far, I've kept my subscription but regularly comment when they go off the rails, which is pretty much daily.
If I wanted to read propaganda and lies, I’d read Russian news. It’s really too bad there isn’t an independent group to review media and report their biases.
Actually there is a podcast my wife listens to -- "On the media."
Check it out.
Thanks!
Read that article. It’s not bashing Biden at all.
The headline is what really counts. Most folks don't read the article.
And they know it.
It's the headline writers I most object too. In terms of being useful and inciteful, it's hard to beat Maggie Haberman.
Unadulterated bs. If anyone does that (only reads the headlines,) that is just their own fault. But obviously YOU don't read the articles or don't care because if you went past the headlines you would see how wrong you are.
Jon --- I said most folks don't read past the headlines. That's a fact.
You have no idea if I read past the headline or not. That's because I never said anything about the contents.
So just admit you were wrong.
And try the decaf.
Nothing WILL stop it. Their business model depends upon outrage and dissension
Remarkable. A federal government that works for the people against the greed of corporations. And I have no doubt that Harris and Walz will build on this effort.
Republicans? They show every day that they work against the people's interests and, in fact, will cripple the government to suit their political interests.
Contrast the work that Walz championed to make sure that children are fed so that they can learn with Republican'ts failure to continue the child tax credit. How can returning millions of children to poverty be a slogan for their idea of government's responsibility to its people?
Remember the Republicans won't pass gun legislation banning weapons like the AR-15. Currently, gun violence is the leading cause of children's deaths. These Republicans are heinous people who don't want to feed hungry children, don't want to fund public education, and are perfectly fine with small children being gunned down in their classrooms and other places. What kind of wicked people are these??!!
Jenn, Very pious and religious ones. Just ask them and their millions of evangelical followers. I am an evangelical Christian, and my People have been brainwashed over the last fifty years that abortion is evil in all circumstances, the R’s are on their side in that, and thus nothing else matters. Everything you said is 100% true, and I agree with you 100%; however, there are literally
Millions of one issue voters. There really are……….It drives me insane, and is so shallow and stupid, and WRONG, and yes wicked.
The coalition of the fat cats of the world, fatter then ever before in our history, plus now that such fat cats control media not just industry, the repulsive wing of racists and creeps, PLUS the “Christians” is such a powerful group that a vile, perverted, evil and corrupt person like Trump can actually be elected. Our country is a mess right now. Plus, social media is a cancer. There is no shared reality anymore. Walter Cronkite and the local daily paper are not coming back. I am still fearful about the future even if we get rid of the poison that is Trump.
I agree with Gandhi, who said, "I like your Christ. I do not like your Christians; they are nothing like your Christ."
Thomas Frank addressed and identified this issue in his 2004 book, "What's the Matter with Kansas?"
Yes, and some of those same kids are the product of rape or incest and yet, once they are born, they're mommy's problem to figure out.
Thank you for putting this truth as baldly as it deserves. I continue to wonder what Republicans’ morals are. Every time I see an ad on TV asking for contributions to feed starving AMERICAN CHILDREN, I wonder. Having never voted for a Republican since Eisenhower, I watch them with increasing disgust. History gives some clues about their meanness, but not enough.
Morals? they don't have morals, they have hate. ["The Anger Games: who Voted for Donald Trump in the 2016 Election, and Why?" Feb. 2018. Google it.
That has been one of my hot buttons for years. A well nourished child learns better than a hungry child. Study after study have shown this to be true.
When my daughter was in school, I was upset because the school would prevent kids that hadn't paid for lunch from eating and/or they would shame a child for getting Federally subsidized lunch. When we switched school districts everyone went through the line and got what they wanted. Plus breakfast was free as well. No shaming.
A well educated populace starts with well fed kids.
Gary, my late husband was a middle-school shop teacher. About five years before we passed the bill providing free breakfast and lunch to all Minnesota students, Glen came home on a Friday afternoon and just headed into his workroom in our basement. Usually, he was happy on Fridays - the weekend and all - but when I went down to ask about dinner I could see he was upset.
Turns out that on his way out of school that afternoon, he encountered one of his students carrying two backpacks - one on front, one on her back. She was smiling and skipping down the hall. Glen asked her what was in the packs so she showed him - food. She was happy because she would have something to eat over the weekend (provided by the local food shelf and organized by a few teachers). Glen was in tears he was so upset.
The following Monday, Glen volunteered to help with the Friday back pack hand outs. And learned a while lot about kids and hunger in his rather wealthy suburban school district.
Can’t tell you how thrilled I was when Walz signed that bill providing free breakfast and lunch. And though Glen had died two years before that,
I knew there was dancing in heaven that day.
Your last comments says it in a nutshell. The GOP does not want a well educated populace. The less-informed, the easier for them to take control. That is why they want to dismantle public education.
Betsy: the republicans do not want government to have responsibility for the people. They have been very consistent in that regard. They want to return us to the golden ($$$) pre-Roosevelt age of monopolies, seniors eating cat food, workers who are dependent on keeping their low-paid jobs just to have crappy health insurance, legalized misogyny and racism, single moms who can’t work because they can’t afford childcare (oops, that’s still true), etc. This is one of their most successful tools in keeping “We The Peons” angry but accepting of their oligarchs’ terms.
"A federal government that works for the people against the greed of corporations."
The Founders were aware of how pernicious unrestrained, government insinuated corporations could be. The British East India Company. It was their tea that got dumped in Boston Harbor.
Republicans? They sell out the common weal, and they sell out posterity, so long as they can maximize their own power.
Great example JL. They were one of the first Common Stock companies and even had their own private armies. That's how some mothers feel as they try to feed their families these days. Who do they blame: the gov'mnt! Who is to blame: The State governments, the greedcorporations...and when will the Feds do something about it. In California, homemakers are facing 30-40% price increases in the food stores. C'mon.
Finally tonight some light on climate change which will affect food prices more and more. We are too far from farmers. Support Jon Tester, the only farmer in the Senate.
I don't know if you saw the article in Bloomberg on how climate change is affecting Ketchup, Virginia. You are absolutely right.
😡
Here're more specifics for you, Michael, on how "they work against the people's interests."
In this case, it's how the billionaire classes have financialized all U.S. higher ed.
We know, following what ALEC did (1974 on), following the Powell memo (1971 on) that all those far-right foundations first attacked American education before moving on to off-shore all those tens of millions of working-class jobs and to commodify all U.S. life.
Easiest first moves were (ALEC) to coordinate all U.S. state legislatures in reducing state funding for higher ed. Students had to go to the banks to pay for the inevitably, more-than-exponentially rising tuition. But the tuition then began rising in multiples.
Why? Colleges and universities set themselves into the new games of branding themselves and literally capitalizing on all that branding. Nothing to do with education -- in fact teaching quality suffered by the killing of tenure. Suffered even more by the ways all set themselves in neutered ("professional"-feigning) silos, most all deliberately isolated from each other.
This video does not go into what the Powell memo's wider, deadlier stratagems were. Does not touch on the parallel predations of standardized testing dehumanizing K-12. But for its look at how U.S. higher ed financialized itself for the nihilist rich, priceless:
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzQVzFSJQZccjRgJNDFRTgnDPRQV?projector=1
And a lot of university teaching is done by inexperienced PhD candidates. A prominent scientist in my acquaintance complains that his colleagues speak of teaching as "loads" and research as "opportunities".
Very good, J L.
More than should be, that much is for certain. My wife was a GTF (Graduate Teaching Fellow) her first year in her Ph.D program. She taught a summer class that had never been taught before, and she had to create the entire class. (She subsequently found other ways to "participate"). I've known at least a dozen GTF's in the music program at the same university over the last 15 years, most of them as on-field directors of the marching band, or as providing lessons to undergrads. At least both of those prepare musicians who go into education in some way, shape, or form.
Sad.
Phil Balla,
Teaching has suffered thus the education of our children and grandchildren.
We can and must do better. Our teachers need encouragement and support. Their job is challenging everyday.
Testing is not a bad thing. If done more often, it may help educators find ways to improve by using different methods of learning.
Students should work to find answers, not just push a button.
I agree with the Finns, Emily, who got rid of standardized testing.
If you understand the mentality of our billionaires, you'll see the true nature of how their testing denatures, dehumanizes, turns life to numbers, units, packages -- turns life into the nihilism by which our billionaires have corrupted most institutions.
Phil, I'm not sure Emily meant "standardized testing." I agree with what you say about them. But tests designed by the teachers are good ways to see if what is being taught is being understood. It also helps the teacher figure out better ways to test students' knowledge. I speak from experience as a teacher (though admittedly on the university level). I preferred using essay questions, but was told by my superior that I had to develop a multiple choice test. Doing so was educational for me, as I saw how easily words and phrases can be misinterpreted. It took 5 years to basically "test the test" to come up with the fairest version, because I took the time to see how my students were answering. If many kept getting the same question wrong by answering in a similar way, I knew it was my problem, not theirs, and I had to take that into consideration and figure out a better way to ask that question. Every teacher has to wrestle with how to figure out whether students are learning or not. So, no, testing is not necessarily a "bad thing." I still prefer reading answers to essay questions, however. It takes more time but truly gives a better concept of how much the student has learned and how well the student can communicate and think through concepts. I realize this may be impractical for lower grades in public school, though in my high school education in NJ, many of our tests had essay questions.
You bring up many good problems, Carol.
When the Finns kicked out the standardized testers, and put emphasis on hiring only the best teachers, the teachers then solved these problems among them.
And got the best public schools in the world.
Very informative - thanks, Carol!
How else can students express themselves than with essay questions? What else encourages them to think if not writing essays? What else is education if not the liberal arts?
Thank you, Phil Balla. Lewis Powell was another “I am better than…” Republican. As a guest at his dinner table, invited by his wife and daughter, I got a taste of that.
Nice note, Virginia, on your personal experience.
I was stationed at South Post, Ft. Myer from November 1969 to November '70 (learning Viet all that year) and on our last day, year-end exams, I took a round-about way to the exam site, stopping off at the Supreme Court. Just to see the building, several of whose justices I'd long admired, been reading.
Turned out they were in session, and the guard motioned for me please to come forward, have a look
Hugo Black. William O, Douglas. Thurgood Marshall. There they were.
A year later and our friend, Lewis P. got his reward for so advancing U.S. commercial vulgarity.
Let's hope Clarence and his fellow taker of bribes, flyer of the flags of insurrection, don't insist on keeping their corrupt tenure, even if Dems have landslide this Nov.
I’m happy for you that you got to see that trio. Wow!
*The conversation would not load Phil.
Please, D4N, try entering into your search engine:
How US Colleges Became Corporations: From Second Thoughts
Those words get me to the video, as does the link I originally appended (my trying again to access it by that link again works correctly):
https://mail.google.com/mail/u/0/#inbox/FMfcgzQVzFSJQZccjRgJNDFRTgnDPRQV?projector=1
Wow, that was a great video! The guy behind Second Thoughts is pretty darned talented and knowledgeable. I always knew tuition was going to other places besides professor salaries.
Yes, Matt -- super good.
So many good, decent Americans. Here on Heather's site. Associated with our many, good, various Dems at all levels. All kinds of guests on late-night, stand-up shows.
Good to know, too, you could access it. Another person here earlier could not.
I just searched for it as you said. The link didn't work. I've subscribed to Second Thought for $5 per month on Patreon. In addition to his videos, you get access to his Discord server. I look forward to conversations with younger folks (I'm 50 and the median age here on Heather's newsletter is well above 50!) about where we need to go from here on out.
Second Thought is a socialist, and I think those USians leaning left should embrace the path forward paved by social democracies such as in Scandinavia.
I live a block away from a very well-regarded college. I see (and hear) daily where a lot of their money goes. They have bought all but four homes (including mine) on both sides of my block (for undisclosed future uses), and they are replacing all their concrete sidewalks with fancy, expensive composite bricks. Yet they frequently ask me to include them in my will (LOL)
Matt, as a former professor for several universities, I can personally attest to that fact! (I'm still trying to get the link to work for me.)
Eu Vey. I just opened the Bloomberg News and KH is already ahead of me. So, I should really erase this Post, but I will leave it for 'Post'erity.
Here's my message to VP Harris this morning before I read the Prof. We are in this together: Dear Madam Vice President;
The campaign is missing an important element of our "future". Food Prices must come down. I have spoken with several female Trumpers and they say it is one of their big issues. Especially in California, where there are no anti profiteering regulations (other than in emergencies). Food companies are gouging consumers and piling the ill gotten profits back into share buybacks. This lack of consumer protection Federally and in many States needs to stop, and adds a new message to your campaign.
I hope this is considered helpful. Bon Chance!
Bruce N. Klassen
“Food prices are sticky – they either don’t come down, or they’ll come down just a little bit,” said Angela Huffman, president of the consumer advocacy non-profit Farm Action. “Companies are setting a new normal.”
The companies’ net profits are up by a median of 51% since just prior to the pandemic, and in one case as much as 950%.
In the last two years specifically, since inflation peaked and started slowing, restaurants have generally recorded the highest profit increases among food companies – a median of 72%.”
https://www.theguardian.com/environment/article/2024/jul/26/food-price-inflation-corporate-profit
And, as I'm sure Farm Action would tell you, those profits are NOT going to family farmers.
And I have to add, the market concentration in the food manufacturing industry is insane. I just read that Mars, Inc., one of the largest conglomerates, plans to acquire the company behind such brands as Pringles and Eggo... for $36 billion.
😳🙄😩
I don't know if your data is accurate (I assume it is) but the buying public knew of the consumer rape that was underway long before it was reported. Business executives and their Board members couldn't believe how easy it has been to extract bountiful profits at the hands of the 'unsuspecting' but hungry buying public! Blame the Administration rather than the purchaser of the next Chris Craft speedboat!
I've most noticed inflation at my local grocery store (pretty high end I admit, Kowalskis here in Minneapolis) regarding steak prices. There are many selling for $40 per pound! But we should all be willing to substitute for this, eat less meat, etc. It is only steak at Kowalskis that is completely out of control. But salmon has also gone up.
Eat less meat....it will save your budget, the earth, and your health. It truly is the answer.
Now I want to talk about Starbucks Grande latte going from $3.25 to $5.25 in 18 months. Not doing Starbucks anymore. They burn their coffee anyway.
Isn't Kowalski's a locally owned company, not one of the corporate giants? If so, challenging their profit margin might be a Twin Cities matter. A local challenge might be inspirational in the larger fight to bring grocery prices down.
Hey Matt, try buying for the family for a couple weeks, not just steaks. Eggs are the worst.
Get your eggs from the guy down the street. He's got 12 layers in his garage!
Peter,, I apologize, but your comment illustrates that you don't understand the time pressures today's Mothers/Homemakers/Fathers of families
face. Yes there are cheaper alternatives to each commodity, but the logistics are prohibitiv, time wise and costly. Try foraging for a family of five.
Bruce, my comment was in no way a reflection on the consumer and the pressures they face to purchase foodstuffs. It was only to reflect on the producers and the sellers and how they are taking advantage of us by inordinate inflation of their products. No one should denigrate them from making an honest profit.
I agree with your text, but do these female Trumpers believe he will deal with these corporations better? If so, they really have their heads in the sand. That's just absurd!!! Vote Blue!!!
Rex, that's the problem. They are absurd! and there is no getting through. And frankly they are just complaining without knowing who is screwing them.
I don’t think they have political ends. It is all about money. Nothing else.
They are so focused with zygotes that they can;t be bothered with matters of child welfare.
JL - I think they may be focusing on making sure women (well, White women) are fulfilling their responsibilities as breeders for the future exploited workers of the world!
And yet many of those people who benefit most from government programs turn to MAGA. There is a terrible lack of education underpinning the Republican Party and one of the first cuts made in Republican controlled states is to public education. They know their constituency well. The oligarchs may support MAGA financially, but they don’t have enough votes among themselves to elect Trump. They do know how to reach the sorry lot who would vote against their own self interests.
The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities noted that the change “underscores the fact that the number of children living in poverty is a policy choice.” They are working against the children's interest as well.
What we're dealing with in terms of everyday Republicans are people who are being spoon-fed lies. It is impossible to have any kind of rational discussion with them. It's the same old song begun my Reagan and expanded by Trump: it's the immigrants, coming in, soaking up benefits, voting illegally, and the like. There is no proof for their claims. The greedy are not the billionaires but rather the welfare queens and the immigrants.
It is mind boggling the depths to which these “people” descend. We have to be on guard constantly. Then they accuse others..very self righteously.. of the very things they are doing themselves. Pretty sick.
mer t, I agree with you. At least, the “Swiftboating” of Walz appears not to be working.
Too many Minnesotans like him for that to be allowed to work.
Sad to say, it is having a resounding success with my retired LE friends.
That is troublesome. LE has to be of sound mind to serve the public's interests. Evidence-based.
"The Party told you to reject the evidence of your eyes and ears. It was their final, most essential command."
I don't think that was ever the case with the majority of those in the field.
That reflects my 35 years spent with my agency, and knowledge of other local agencies. It has gotten so much worse since 2008, when the bandages got ripped off the scab of racism and it began to run free.
I hate it when reality lives down to my expectations.
Given what you’ve told us about them, Ally, I doubt they were persuadable anyway. They’re just looking for something that doesn’t look racist and misogynistic to justify supporting Trump. Which they were going to do anyway.
I think your assessment is accurate. I just jousted with a couple veteran friends (both former trainees of mine) who see no difference in their perception of Tim Walz's "lies about his rank" and the lies spouted by fpotus.
How depressing.
🙄
LE?
Law enforcement.
Their accusations are pretty self-evidently an absurd stretch.
Good 👍
And pretty sick how well it has (so far) worked out for them.
It's because MAGAt's are in a bubble, where they hear only what the bubble lets through. My "feelers" tell me that they are getting really nervous and defensive these days though.
Figures that President Biden is fighting price gouging by the corporate rich.
And also that Republicans defend their brethren rich corporate predators.
Figures, too, that President Biden and Dems in Congress are trying to do something to spur housing construction for America's working classes -- and in parallel to that how Senate Republicans want to stop "big guvmint" from helping the abandoned tens of millions who truly need help.
Our billionaire classes will ever invest in luxury housing only. Cannot imagine any helping hands except to the corrupt in Congress and on the even-more-corrupt Clarence court who see government as only subsidizers, rationalizers for the billionaire classes.
So much in Heather's today on the good efforts by Biden, Harris, good Dems abroad the land. So why is it predictable, too, that the orange felon and his cult crew in reply can only issue insult, invective, and lies? Have the rich so poisoned themselves and all their bribed-in-high-places that they can treat the democracy they hate only as their orange felon, their Long Dong Clarence, and the rest of their stooges do?
The imperative to maximize profit uber alles incentivizes sociopathy.. Traditionally it's not money as such that is evil; it's money as an exclusive and overriding focus.
Read Autocracy Inc. It is necessary if not wholly sufficient for our understanding of the WHY?.
NPR’s Fresh Air with Dave Davies has a directly and chillingly relevant piece today on the scope and effect of lobbying on American government by a wide range of domestic and foreign interests.
One particularly pernicious gambit is to use lobbying, a constitutionally protected activity to petition the government to redress grievances, as a way to launder enormous sums of money from despicable, brutal autocratic regimes, which cannot directly contribute to congress members. Instead they give millions to American lobbyists who will then act as cut outs and simply pass on the money to American politicians, fooling no one as to where the funds are from, a tactic for which Paul Manafort was convicted, and then pardoned by Trump.
https://podcasts.apple.com/us/podcast/fresh-air/id214089682?i=1000665326651
Thank you Ed Guerrant
How American Lobbyists Threaten Democracy
NPR Fresh Air Podcast | August 14, 2024 4:51 PM ET
<iframe src="https://www.npr.org/player/embed/1197979992/1257276254" width="100%" height="290" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" title="NPR embedded audio player"></iframe>
Casey Michel shines a light on Americans lobbying for foreign governments in Washington, in many cases representing brutally repressive regimes and countries that oppose U.S. interests. Laws requiring registration of lobbyists and disclosure of their efforts have been little-enforced, and thus ignored by countless agents who've reaped huge profits from their work. Michel's new book is Foreign Agents.
I have read repeatedly in the MSM that popular public initiatives are "blocked by the (insert wealthy interest here) lobby like it's a law of nature that cannot be overcome. I have read that laws written by "powerful lobbies" are passed by Congress nearly verbatim. Isn't that a T-rex i the room? Like a form of organized crime inserting itself between the public and "our" representatives, and little is done about it? Is that the government we were promised in school? Or something broken?
Thanks to Biden and Harris/Waltz for seeking alternatives. Trump, on the other had can't wait to cut the taxes of the very wealthy yet again.
Well there has been almost NO legislation passed in the past two years of any kind let alone pro lobby legislation, as the current House is totally dysfunctional and couldn't pass a bill to pay for ice cream these days due to Mike Johnson and the maga constituency. So I doubt there is any current legislation that would meet your accusation.
Interestingly most of that cookie cutter legislation I’m reading about is targeted towards state legislatures. There’s been reporting that the more powerful lobbies’ suggested legislation is being passed verbatim by those legislatures.
Imagine that...
I’m shocked, shocked.
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=HMIyDf3gBoY&pp=ygUbTW92aWUgY2FzYWJsYW5jYSBpbSBzaG9ja2Vk
Thank you for the great rundown Professor ⭐
Go Asheville, North Carolina for demanding payment for the city’s expenses, prior to allowing trump to speak at his rally!!!
Albuquerque still hasn’t received a penny of almost a half million dollars for his rally in Rio Rancho. His plane landed in Albuquerque, ABQ police escorted his motorcade to Rio Rancho, back to ABQ to spend the night in a downtown hotel, and to the airport in the morning. The expenses escalated because he insisted that the high rise city hall and county buildings were adjacent to the hotel he picked. So both high rises had to be vacant while he was here, meaning hundreds of employees had to be given two paid days off.
Looks like not paying venue fees is a Trump modus operandi! Cities were stiffed in the 2020 election. https://www.cnn.com/2019/10/10/politics/trump-campaign-rallies-outstanding-invoices/index.html
Cities are being stiffed currently and this has been limiting his rally sizes. https://coppercourier.com/2024/08/13/trump-unpaid-venues-small-rallies/
Observation; if this orange clown stiffs your city for $100,000s of unpaid bills and you still vote for him, you are an idiot who deserves the other self-defeating choices in your life!
He claimed he didn’t need to pay Albuquerque because his rally wasn’t held here.
Our local news this morning had a story about how many cities were stiffed by the Trump campaign in 2016. Pittsfield, MA has sent a bill to the Harris-Walz campaign for the reimbursement of costs associated with a recent rally there, but the amount is nothing compared to the bills that Trump has racked up. (Just to clarify: I am not implying that the amount is nothing to the City of Pittsfield!)
While your narrative is enlightening and, sadly, valid, it is important to recognize how severely the "neoliberal"-free-market-fundamentalism-anti-government policies of both political parties over the past 40 years have sapped (stolen) resources from all levels of government as well as all families earning below the top 1% of incomes. This has diverted reasonable tax government income, preventing investment in basic equitable programs such as public education, infrastructure maintenance, child care, etc. Thus huge amounts of resources are diverted to the personal pockets of the extremely wealthy. Take food costs, for instance. This is a basic kitchen table issue. They are high and burdensome, even after the control of inflation and the overall national increase in wages, because of the unrestrained oligopolistic concentration of all sectors of the food chain (with 4 or less corporations controlling over 60% of the most sectors of the food chain from farming to processing to retail groceries). This is a setup for price gauging and excess profits. This does not get enough publicity. It also seems the policies of Republicans, before, and especially after Trump, want to make this situation worse for ordinary people.
Yes, definitely "both political parties".... I must admit I'm looking forward to the next 3.5 years of silence about "both sides" until it becomes convenient again.
I have one word for the Felon™️. Pathetic.
Pathetic is one word, but there are lots more we need to keep in mind. Here are two: malicious and dangerous.
He and the depraved "Republican" party are quite a piece of work.
But also malignant.
And incurable!
Thanks Heather,
How can the GOP go lower. I expect we will be surprised if a bottom that we could never have imagined!
I never ask that…
How can the GOP go lower? Same question often asked of a drunkard. Each usually finds a way.
The depths of perfidy of the "GOP" beggars the imagination.
Be prepared, Chris!
I would like to see you devote a newsletter to the history and evolution of the US press. Technology has radically changed the distribution of information in society. When print newspaper were the main method publishers controlled content and thereby influenced public opinion. Owners of broadcast TV and famous news outlets seem to believe they still have the power to manipulate voters/control public opinion. But their power is shrinking due to newer independent web-based news outlets & social media.
Roseanne Barr was among the first to realize she could bypass the press while running for President using twitter. Trump piggybacked on that idea. Trump also perfected the art of refusing reporter access unless they met his criteria (no fact-checking, no hard questions).
The famous news outlets (NYT, WaPo, etc.) are so drunk with their own perceived power they spin/distort news to serve their own agendas and biases with impunity.
Harris seems to be asserting her own power to ignore unreasonable/unfair reporters but still get her message out by talking directly to the public, in person or on twitter. Good for her.
The US press a big, important subject and I would like to hear your thoughts.
Subscriptions should be as easy to cancel as they are to start.
These nuisance non-services especially hurt people with multiple responsibilities who don’t have time to stay on hold for 15 minutes. Credit card companies unsurprisingly side with the subscription providers. This is the perfect place for consumer protection laws.
We regulate highways. We regulate building codes and land use. Why the hell not regulate commerce to avoid people getting hurt? Mandate a reasonably "square deal"? You get to go pretty much wherever you want on our nations highways, but not at excessive speeds and though red lights at intersections.
Many years ago someone from corporate Black and Decker told my father that only a small percentage of people who buy items at ostensibly reduced prices with rebates actually collect them. Rebates became much harder to collect (much reduced deadlines) since then) although it now seems to me that the whole practice is becoming less popular of late.
Auto pay from my account to streaming services are very tough. I'm having a hard time with AppleTV+. HULU sends 2 charges on my account monthly. 😒
The point of holding office is to serve and solve problems, period. Something the Republicans seem to have forgotten.
Among Biden's many better-known accomplishments are $35 maximum monthly insulin expenses for seniors -- but the convicted felon who is, like, really smart because his uncle went to MIT, said today that it was actually himself who did that.
Trump is a delusional liar. And he is lazy to boot. I have zero sympathy or patience for his nonsense.
He is indeed a very lazy liar whose lies are clumsy and preposterous, yet taken to be gospel by those who swallowed the cult pill.
Unfortunately, I have personal experience which compels me to agree with you completely und unequivocally, JL. It makes me want to cry for my grandchildren who have no choice in the bubble they are growing up in.
And split the atom and first reached the North Pole. Wait, it's coming.
Remember they believe he is God's annointed in these "End Times". Arrrrrrghghghgh
"The Biden-Harris administration has changed the orientation of the United States government from relying on markets to order society and protecting the interests of wealthy Americans in the expectation that they would invest in the economy more efficiently than they could if the government interfered by protecting workers and consumers. Biden and Harris, along with the cabinet officers and staff of the executive branch, revived an older ideology calling for the government to promote the interests of the American people as a whole."
Over and over I have heard politicians and economics commentators cite that "efficiency" as a justification to withhold policy. Efficiency can be a very good thing, but only when you ask efficiency of what? Nazis were efficiently genocidal. When I look at what Republicans talk about I primarily see great efficiency in hoovering money from the general public into the pockets of the 1%.
Thank you, Heather, for the breakdown before we all have a breakdown over MSM never reporting anything positive about Joe and Kamala! Don’t really know how they can call themselves journalists when their reports are so skewed. They are like tourists at a zoo…feeding the messengers. Shameful people.
I used to look up to the press but not anymore. They only give Joe Biden and his administration a bad time for working hard for the American people and democracy. I’m not having it.
Arrrggghhh! First stop reading "the press" and then criticize it even though you don't read it anymore for not reporting what you want to hear!!! Do you realize how ridiculous that sounds?
I apologize I am not trying to punch down anyone here, I have subscribed to Heather's newsletter for several years and I may get chased out for being so angry about the insane attacks on the press which has a hard job to do and at least the NY Times does it better than most. But we need that press, because while the few here are a choir preaching to each other, you need to realize how important the press is to getting the word out to the vast majority of people who don't read Heather's stack. We are a small minority here and while the press isn't perfect it's easy better than no press at all.
Seriously.
Jon, I believe many of us would have a different opinion of the press and mainstream media if they were once again held to the standards of the Fairness Doctrine that was extinguished by Reagan and Murdoch for their own political agenda. We do need a fair and free press who share facts, not opinions as fact. Truth matters.
You need to learn something accurate about history my friend. Newspapers were NEVER held to the Fairness Doctrine which only applies to TELEVISION and RADIO (ie licensed media... newspapers have never been licensed). So even by quoting the fairness doctrine while we are discussing the new york times shows a lack of knowledge about how journalism works.
Jon, I don’t have a NYT subscription. What did they write about Trump’ rally yesterday?
I wrote something about this: https://open.substack.com/pub/johnrochatnorcal/p/pssst-theyre-not-listening-to-your?r=1pjrv1&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web