Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Annoying New York Times articles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Nefertiti2
    replied
    New York Times guidance on reporting on Israel Palestine

    restrict the use of the terms “genocide” and “ethnic cleansing” and to “avoid” using the phrase “occupied territory” when describing Palestinian land, according to a copy of an internal memo obtained by The Intercept.

    The memo also instructs reporters not to use the word Palestine “except in very rare cases” and to steer clear of the term “refugee camps” to describe areas of Gaza historically settled by internally displaced Palestinians, who fled from other parts of Palestine during previous Israeli–Arab wars. The areas are recognized by the United Nations as refugee camps and house hundreds of thousands of registered refugees.

    Leave a comment:


  • Antepli Ejderha
    replied
    https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1762668282593591414?t=OeRER9QgJqyt2CQ-sy-_Xg&s=19

    So Sella and Anat Schwartz are relatives and they spread the lies, both should are Lord Haw Haws and along with whoever employed them they should be off to the Hague.

    We know it won't happen though, all will get away with enabling and promoting genocide.

    Leave a comment:


  • Antepli Ejderha
    replied
    https://twitter.com/zei_squirrel/status/1762667307015221401?t=tqJOcCvDCF6-MGiCvTIPzQ&s=19

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    That's also a rather credulous account of how academics get to be in charge of universities. It's about fundraising, which is, at that level, about relationships.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    Very much so.

    And it makes perfect sense to me that she never knew the details of their investment portfolio.

    Leave a comment:


  • WOM
    replied
    Such a great story. And that she's still so engaged with the place at 93.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    On the condition that they make tuition cost-free for everyone going forward.

    Leave a comment:


  • WOM
    replied
    A good NYT article for you today....

    Doctor, who apparently didn't realize how wealthy she and her husband were, gives $1 Billion to Albert Einstein College of Medicine...where she works.

    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/02/26/n...smid=url-share

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Before long, Mr. Losonsky, who had bought the couple’s old apartment before meeting Ms. Wassenaar and had paid off the mortgage, came to another realization: With rent coming in and few expenses, he no longer needed to work. He retired in late 2019, just before turning 50.

    Leave a comment:


  • Plodder
    replied
    I'm not entirely sure these two have grasped the underlying ethos of the tiny homes movement...

    https://www.nytimes.com/2024/01/26/realestate/tiny-home-italy-sardinia-mandriola.html

    Leave a comment:


  • caja-dglh
    replied
    The guy they killed called it in advance. It's OK though because the Supreme Court was fine with it.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    JFC

    Alabama Hails Nitrogen Gas Execution, a New Attempt to Address an Old Challenge


    Fending off doubts and criticisms, Alabama’s attorney general hailed a new execution method as “humane and effective.”

    Leave a comment:


  • Incandenza
    replied
    Not annoying, but great article about the NYT from David Roth
    https://defector.com/hiding-and-seek...new-york-times

    But if every single visible aspect of this story has been unappealing and insulting in its particulars, it's worth sparing a moment of consideration for the invisible aspect. The double-bylined Times blow-by-blow of Gay's last days as Harvard's president, after a rundown of various incidents—Ackman tweeting some things that were true and some other things that weren't, those uncomfortable conversations about the alma mater in Turks & Caicos—notes that "newspaper articles about Dr. Gay and the board kept coming."

    That is less a passive or exonerative construction than an admission of where and how the Times sees its role in all this—as the invisible hand of respectable opinion, a tidal force that carries things forward or back. To be fair, the paper will also write stories about how diversity as a concept and corporate practice are overwhelmingly popular, and about how virtually none of the dire implications of those antisemitism hearings were grounded in observable reality, and about how all that deep concern about antisemitism has already been abandoned by Congresspeople and activists alike in favor of a more open-ended campaign against older targets. The coverage is honest in that way, but crucially less so about the bigger question of how all of this vapor and gossip and recursive rich-guy umbrage became a story in the first place.

    It would be foolish and exhausting to speculate on the role that Times editor-in-chief Joseph Kahn (Harvard '87, Harvard M.A. '90) played in pushing this story; there is nothing to do but speculate, there. Power works in different ways, and if Ackman–style public meltdowns are the loudest and most overt expression of that work, and Rufo's store-brand Rasputin act are the most obviously motivated, they are not the only ones. There is also the Times' understanding of itself as the author of the discourse, and all that ostentatious invisibility—the decisions about what is and is not a story, or what is and is not up for debate, that only show up in the negative.

    You already know how that works; we are soaking in it. Someone at the institution decides that there is or ought to be, say, a debate about the safety or advisability of trans health care where no such debate actually exists, and then the debate is manufactured to suit that sense—in and through stories about that debate. And then, at some point down the line, some laws are promulgated that reflect that debate's terms.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    The NYT actually mixes it up depending on the type of headline

    https://www.frontpages.com/the-new-york-times/

    I once knew what they called each type, but that was a long time ago

    Leave a comment:


  • Plodder
    replied
    It's pretty common in many US publications. Prepositions don't make the capitalization cut.

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    Yes

    Leave a comment:


  • Sporting
    replied
    Why is every word in the headline capitalized apart from in? NYT style guide?

    Leave a comment:


  • ursus arctos
    replied
    https://twitter.com/heerjeet/status/1721219020085440971?s=12&t=xvOireV8JOIS_CpbTtDBow

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    The NY Times is one of a handful of the most overrated institutions in US culture.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    It’s not a trio. It’s a quartet. If you click on that to see the whole image, it includes a Maureen Dowd piece giving advice to Taylor Swift and Travis Kelce.

    Leave a comment:


  • Plodder
    replied
    Not even the worst section of today's paper. The framing of pretty much every article on the Hamas/Israel story is, entirely expectedly, just awful.

    Leave a comment:


  • scratchmonkey
    replied
    David Brooks is sad that he wasn't included in that trio of Incredible Takes.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    The problem with Ok, Boomer is that a lot of kids seem to think everyone older than 20 is a boomer.

    Leave a comment:


  • San Bernardhinault
    replied
    I'm astonished to find out that David French isn't a Boomer.

    Leave a comment:


  • Hot Pepsi
    replied
    Any headline of “X is not as Y as you think” is a good indicator that the argument to follow is asinine.

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X