Link to tweet

If you don't unite in support of Trump - racist violence may continue.


In "The Five Stages of Fascism," published in 1998, Paxton defined seven feelings that act as "mobilizing passions" for fascist regimes:

Link to tweet

Link to tweet

That was a poor headline but only one of several. Read these other examples in this morning's edition, on the front page of the online version I subscribe to:

"Trump on defense in debate over extremism and guns"
"Trump's racism is a global problem for our country" (Susan Rice)
"The Nihilist in Chief"
"Trump is a white nationalist who inspires terrorism"
"White nationalism has been linked to some of the deadliest shootings in America in recent years"

Cancelling an NYT subscription is a terrible idea. The NYT is one of our last bastions of true investigative journalism and honest editorials speaking truth to fire. It costs a lot of money to do the deep investigative stories they do. Unsubscribing is striking a blow for the death toll of a free press.

Writers do NOT write their own headlines. A note to the paper questioning that particularly headline is fine. I think the editor will get the message and improve (maybe already has, based on today's headers which are not at all pro-Trump).

It's a marketing tool that's been used for decades, and online perhaps most notably by Google tailoring the results you get for any given search based on past algorithms. It's also what contributed to (and continues) the development of red and blue Facebook feeds.

But don't take my word for it. Here's what they have to say about it:
https://help.nytimes.com/hc/en-us/articles/360003965994-Personalization

Just in case you don't know about Facebook's red and blue feeds, here's a tool from the WSJ that allows us to compare trending posts on some political topics: http://graphics.wsj.com/blue-feed-red-feed/

*Edited for bad sentence construction.

NYT is merely both sidesist and subscribes to the cult of the savvy.
They don’t have a planned agenda to harm America to benefit billionaires.

The WSJ has a planned agenda to harm America to benefit billionaires. That’s what Rupert Murdoch does.

Be careful with ANYTHING that comes out of WSJ. Some is good, but much is twisted through a rightwing lens.

and was promoted by everyone from Duke University to MSNBC. It was developed by John Keegan of Columbia's Journalism School's Tow Center for Digital Journalism. He worked for the WSJ before Murdoch's takeover. I'm a librarian and I don't need to be schooled on how to vet my sources, thank you very much.

Gerry Baker was most active pushing WSJ to be pro-Trump in 2015 and 2016.

I hear what you’re saying and this article sounds fine.

But I really really wish all of us would start telling the world how Murdoch uses WSJ — I’ll bet you that Bill Barr reads WSJ and that’s a big reason he believes Trump is good.

Writers suggest their own headlines.

Here are the biggest problems at the NYT:

- Patrick Healy: Politics editor. He’s the real problem. He writes the headlines or approved them.

- Dean Baquet: Head editor. Healy’s boss. He ultimately makes the calls on headlines. He’s susceptible to pressure- he probably changed this one. He FIRED THE PUBLIC EDITOR, the person at the Times who is meant to reflect on their errors. He’s a huge problem- and the tweet above says many NYT employees are angry at him.

- James Bennet, opinion editor. Hired Bret Stephens and continues to employ him. Nuff said.

- Peter Baker: news analyst, not a reporter. The most bothsidesist and craven and “savvy” of any writer on the NYT News side.


I’m cancelling my sub and will not re subscribe till at least two of the four above are fired.

The NYT is not what it has been. Cancel it. Read instead the New Yorker, the Atlantic, and the Washington Post.

Maybe he's been LindseyGrahamed.

I think Baquet has somehow deeply internalized the idea that it’s not ok to make conservatives angry.
Without understanding the basic truth that conservatives are willing to lie if it will push the NYT to the right.

Not an evil, complicit cabal, as so many on the right and on the far left would have it.

Journalists sometimes make bad decisions in good faith. This is one of those times.

this latest lurch to the anti-American right and lying is already part of a pattern

back in the day.

...when the NYT helped George Bush and Dick Cheney lie us into a war.

Judith Miller

And grew up reading the NYT. I always liked it.
But for the last several years have been very unhappy with their coverage.
I bought a subscription for the Washington Post and really like is so much better.

Quoted here:

https://www.washingtonpost.com/nation/2019/08/06/new-york-times-headline-trump-backlash/

they didn't make it easy. I couldn't cancel it online. No. I had to call them. And of course the service rep wouldn't just cancel it, done. No. He wanted to know why I wanted to cancel. I know he was following a script and he didn't personally care, so I tried to be polite, but it really pissed me off.

The tedious and time-consuming cancellation process made me even happier I did it.

I had just subscribed for the cooking section.
But “...Urges Unity”!? Hell no!

not to pay them.

I set up my online account to automatically pay.
When I cancelled, I just changed 1 number on my payment account.
When payment wouldn't go through, I'd get the standard email about
my payment not being processed and please update my account.
I don't update it, they didn't get paid, my account was cancelled.

No explanation, no form, no NYT.

If you pay with an account, debit card, credit card, ... just change 1 number.

That number could be the account number, credit card number, expiration date, the 3 or 4 digit secret code, ...
anything will trip up the payment.

so they sucked it up and chose to spew his bullshit.

does some good investigative journalism. They've been better than the NY Times lately.

Way too many third-rate, right-leaning opinionistas---Dowd, Brooks, Douthat. Sure as hell isn't the liberal bastion it once was. And I want my editorial cartoons back, you NYT chickenshits!

Their cooking section is still outstanding, however. Lots of good recipes.

I prefer the Washington Post these days. The NYT has devolved into a "both siderism" paper.

I just opened my digital copy of the NYT and found a different appearing front page than that above. The story appears to be the same but with a new headline: https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/05/us/politics/trump-guns-white-supremacy.html - it is still a different front page now after about 15 minutes of doing other things. I wonder how much backlash they got . . . or someone saner took charge?

Journalists generally correct mistakes.

Politicians and ideologues don't.

Please know that anything other than a slim cadre of journalists — the attention-seekers (i.e. Judith Miller) and partisan hacks (Fox News) — seek to make things right.

To paint us as an evil monolith of bad morals and judgment is nonsensical.

The NYT seems to have an endemic tropism to power that too often leads them in unhealthy or irresponsible directions like this headline.

Not that any media are immune to this disease, of course. But in general, I find the Washington Post to be a much more reliable source for reporting and analysis of national politics, especially in election years, than the NYT,

on behalf of his plutocratic minders just about three miles from the NYT building.....

Link to tweet

riding his cart down the fairway on the back nine.................

in prominent positions in journalism.

Link to tweet

From Jay Rosen and Will bunch

Link to tweet