President-elect Donald Trump sounded very much like presidential candidate Donald Trump on Sunday morning in a pair of misleading tweets about the New York Times.
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
Wow, the @nytimes is losing thousands of subscribers because of their very poor and highly inaccurate coverage of the "Trump phenomena"
4:16 PM - 13 Nov 2016
Donald J. Trump ✔ @realDonaldTrump
The @nytimes sent a letter to their subscribers apologizing for their BAD coverage of me. I wonder if it will change - doubt it?
4:43 PM - 13 Nov 2016
According to the New York Times Co.'s latest earnings report, the number of print copies it sold in the third quarter was down from the same period in 2015, but the decline was more than offset by 116,000 new digital-only subscriptions. Overall, third-quarter circulation revenue rose 3 percent; through the first nine months of the year, circulation revenue was up 2.8 percent.
Since Trump launched his White House campaign in June 2015, digital-only news subscriptions to the Times have increased 35 percent, to more than 1.3 million.
Trump's suggestion that the Times is bleeding readers because of “very poor and highly inaccurate coverage” does not square with the numbers.
The president-elect's interpretation of a letter to subscribers as an apology for bad coverage is a stretch. Times publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr. wrote Friday that one of the “inevitable questions” in the aftermath of the campaign is: “Did Donald Trump's sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters?”
“As we reflect on this week's momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism,” Sulzberger added.[...]
Yet Sulzberger's full letter makes clear that he was simply renewing a promise that he believes the Times fulfilled during the campaign.
“We believe we reported on both candidates fairly during the presidential campaign,” he wrote. “You can rely on the New York Times to bring the same level of fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.”
Trump is right. I read some of the comments on a couple of Huffington Post articles. Many of the HP's were upset and angry about the way they covered this election. (The HP was stupid enough to declare Trump as entertainment only and not news worthy.)
ReplyDeleteThe NYT would not have written a letter like this had they not realized that they lost credibility.
As we reflect on this week’s momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you.
The mainstream media's lack of objectivity really came through this election season.
you really think that NY Times is confessing to misleading the public and do a sloppy job or reporting? You think their readership has dropped as a result?
ReplyDeleteThere is no question you think that they did a bad job - but the question under discussion is whether their letter is a confession to what you have accused them of.
it is merely wishful thinking to claim that the letter is a confession
They wrote their letter for a purpose. If they've alienated some of their own readership, then this letter is to bring them back. By acknowledging what it is that is bothering these readers, and committing to not make the same errors again, it brings them back. That's what I see as the purpose of the letter.
ReplyDeleteWhat do see the purpose of the letter being? Why did they write it?
Where does it say that they acknowledge that their reporting was dishonest?
ReplyDeleteIn this week’s parsha: “What, then, Abimelech demanded of Abraham, was your purpose in doing this thing? I thought, said Abraham, surely there is no fear of God in this place, and they will kill me because of my wife.” (Genesis 20:10-11)
ReplyDeleteבראשית פרק כ פסוק י
וַיֹּאמֶר אֲבִימֶלֶךְ אֶל אַבְרָהָם מָה רָאִיתָ כִּי עָשִׂיתָ אֶת הַדָּבָר הַזֶּה:
פסיקתא זוטרתא (לקח טוב) בראשית פרשת וירא פרק כ סימן י
ויאמר אבימלך אל אברהם מה ראית כי עשית את הדבר הזה. לפי שלא היו שטופי זימה כמו המצרים:
Abimelech asks properly because he is not like the debauched Pharaoh. The NYT and other USA media are morally astray.
in plain English - are you saying you can make up any lies against the NYT because you view them as morally astray?! The corollary is that any lies can be made up about Trump because he is clearly morally astray!!
ReplyDeleteIf I write you a letter saying that I am rededicating myself to wear shoes, then the implication is that I had stopped wearing shoes. If you want to read it differently, fine. But how is Trump a liar for making this point??? This is the way the average person understands this.
ReplyDeleteThe NYT has not confessed to anything, but the appearance of such a letter is evidence that they are feeling the heat on the seat of the pants, as they well should.
ReplyDeleteNo difference to me. I stopped reading the Times long ago. I consider it an anti-Israel, pro-Palestinian, leftist shmatte.
you mean the average Trump follower
ReplyDeleteNope. Rededicating in this context does not mean that they stopped. They are assuring their readers that despite the attacks from Trump on the free press throughout his campaign, they are going to rededicate themselves to criticizing the President when they see fit, and that they will not be cowed by his threats. If you read the letter, it is clear that this is their meaning.
ReplyDeleteCan you please tell me another way of understanding the letter, in a clear manner, without telling me that I am ignorant or some other pejorative. I understand that the letter does not actually confess to anything, but read between the lines. BTW, I am not a Trump supporter, I couldn't bring myself to vote for such a clown.
ReplyDeleteYay, the libtard hypocrite is back with another stupid comment. I thought that you'd be busy celebrating and rioting on the streets. Perhaps burning down a Walgreens along the way.
ReplyDeleteWhere were you when Barak Obama attacked Rush Limbaugh and tried to shut down talk radio? He was legislating laws to shut him down. He relentlessly attacked him. He attacked Fox news. Not an attacking and smug comment out of you about that. I read the letter. You can spin it the same you spun so many other things. The average person does not see it the way you do.
Are you offering an alternative explanation?
ReplyDelete1: Please note where I indicated that I would be rioting, or anything of the sort.
ReplyDelete2: What does my providing a reading of the Times letter have to do with what Barack Obama said about Rush Limbaugh? By the way, did Obama suggest changing libel laws so that politicians could not be attacked by the free press?
3: I don't know where you get your assessment of the "average reader." Please share.
Please see my comment below for another (and, in my opinion, more accurate) way of understanding the letter.
ReplyDeleteAnd for the record, this is not the first time when you have hurled some accusation at me concerning something I have (supposedly) written, and when challenged to show where I wrote that, you maintain radio silence and move on to the next attack. So, once again, please indicate where I suggested that I would be rioting, or anything of the sort.
ReplyDeleteTwo articles about NYT bias and its devotion to The Narrative:
ReplyDeletehttp://nypost.com/2016/11/14/the-new-york-times-cant-improve-until-it-admits-bias/
http://deadline.com/2016/11/shocked-by-trump-new-york-times-finds-time-for-soul-searching-1201852490/