Journalism

When It Comes to Covering Trump, The New York Times Has Abandoned Any Distinction Between Reporting and Opinion

Readers may be better served by a newspaper that is open about its reporters' opinions. But then it can hardly object when Trump publicly describes them as political opponents.

|

Two recent New York Times stories raise the question of whether the paper any longer makes a distinction between news and opinion when it comes to covering Donald Trump. One piece, identified as a "political memo," makes the case that the president is not nearly as smart as he thinks he is, while the other, presented as a content analysis of Trump's comments during COVID-19 briefings, argues that he indulges in unprecedented self-praise, self-pity, and blame shifting.

Those portrayals will strike Trump's critics, presumably including most Times readers, as essentially accurate. But they do not belong in the news section unless the Times has abandoned any pretense that its reporting, as distinct from its opinion section, aspires to even-handedness and political neutrality. While the reality has always been quite different, the paper's bias in its news coverage has never been more blatant.

Under the headline "Trump's Disinfectant Remark Raises a Question About the 'Very Stable Genius,'" national political reporter Matt Flegenheimer mocks the president's perceptions of his own intelligence and intellectual seriousness. "The president has often said he is exceptionally smart," the subhead says. "His recent suggestion about injecting disinfectants was not." Referring to last Thursday's coronavirus briefing, during which Trump suggested that injections of disinfectants such as bleach and isopropyl alcohol might prove to be effective treatments for COVID-19, Flegenheimer observes: "Mr. Trump's performance that evening…did not sound like the work of a doctor, a genius, or a person with a good you-know-what."

Flegenheimer suggests that Trump's disinfectant comments could hurt him even among die-hard supporters: "Mr. Trump's typical name-calling can be recast to receptive audiences as mere 'counterpunching.' His impeachment was explained away as the dastardly opus of overreaching Democrats. It is more difficult to insist that the man floating disinfectant injection knows what he's doing." Although the piece quotes various observers (all critical of Trump) regarding the episode and its potential political ramifications, there is no mistaking the author's opinion of the president's intelligence.

In a story headlined "260,000 Words, Full of Self-Praise, From Trump on the Virus," Washington correspondents Jeremy Peters and Maggie Haberman, together with national political reporter Elaina Plott, summarize their transcript analysis this way: "The self-regard, the credit-taking, the audacious rewriting of recent history to cast himself as the hero of the pandemic rather than the president who was slow to respond: Such have been the defining features of Mr. Trump's use of the bully pulpit during the coronavirus outbreak….The transcripts show striking patterns and repetitions in the messages he has conveyed, revealing a display of presidential hubris and self-pity unlike anything historians say they have seen before."

Peters, Plott, and Haberman are ostensibly presenting data, counting "roughly 600" instances of "self-congratulation," "more than 260" examples of giving credit to others, "more than 110" examples of blaming others, and "about 160" expressions of empathy. They also quote sources (again, all critics of Trump) who offer their own views. But the authors are unmistakably communicating their low regard for the president in a way that might make the piece an interesting addition to the opinion section but is hardly consistent with straight reporting or even news "analysis."

Trump has always viewed outlets like the Times as overtly hostile to him, and stories like these only confirm that impression. The articles dress up opinion as reporting, drawing conclusions that may be perfectly defensible but rely on value judgments and character assessments that readers would ordinarily expect from commentators rather than reporters. While the president's attacks on the news media are frequently unhinged and overbroad, "reporting" like this validates his thesis that much of the press corps is out to get him.

There is a difference between reporting facts that make Trump uncomfortable, or reporting the opinions of Trump critics, and calling him stupid, uninformed, vain, petty, irresponsible, and self-obsessed. By crossing that line, the Times is erasing the distinction between reporting and advocacy.

Maybe that's for the best. There is nothing wrong with advocacy or opinion journalism (I do it all the time!), as long as it is intellectually honest and explicitly identified as such. The subtler forms of bias that were apparent in news coverage by the Times long before Trump was elected—manifested in decisions about which facts to include or omit, which sources to quote, and which angles to emphasize—are more insidious and therefore more misleading.

Readers may be better served by a newspaper that is open about its prejudices and does not pretend that it aspires to anything like objectivity, which was always an impossible standard to meet, or even balance. But if that is the route the Times chooses, it must abandon the notion that what it does is fundamentally different from what Fox News does, and its "reporters" can hardly object when Trump publicly describes them as political opponents.

NEXT: Undercover Cops Arrest 2 Women for Operating Home Beauty Businesses In Violation of Coronavirus Lockdown Order

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. This is news?

    1. I think it’s commentary.

      1. Is that your opinion?

        1. That’s what I’m thinkin’.

    2. Wonder which of our TDS crew will have their heads explode over this article.

      1. I just think it’s hilarious the pot decided to write a story about the kettle

      2. The article is fine.

        The thing about the Trump fans here is they never ask anyone who criticizes Trump what they think about the New York Times, or anything else. The Trump fans always tell us what we think: we are all liberals, we all have TDS, and about a million other things they “know” about us without any evidence.

        1. Nyt has been straight advocacy for 30 years – from Punch’s retirement. Their readers are an embarrassment and primarily homogametic. Trump understands this of course and has fun at their expense. Progs are gross, natch. Nice evening :D.

    3. FACT CHECK: No, Trump Did Not Tell People To ‘Inject Themselves With Disinfectant’ Or ‘Drink Bleach’

      Quotes:
      A few moments later [in the same conference], ABC News reporter Jon Karl asked Bryan, “The president mentioned the idea of a cleaner, bleach and isopropyl alcohol emerging. There’s no scenario where that could be injected into a person, is there?”

      Trump then clarified his remarks: “It wouldn’t be through injections, you’re talking about almost a cleaning and sterilization of an area. Maybe it works, maybe it doesn’t work, but it certainly has a big affect if it’s on a stationary object.”

    4. Hilarious coming from Reason.

      Demonstrating once again that #LeftistsAlwaysProject.

  2. But Trump is objectively Hitler, it’s simply a fact! Should respectable media outlets ignore this in pursuit of false equivalence, when the survival of the world is at stake?

    /sarc

    1. OUR DEMOCRACY IS AT STAKE!!!11!!!111!!

      1. And much too important to let people vote.

    2. Trump isn’t bright enough to be a modern Hitler. Hitler would have known the difference between the Pulitzer and Nobel prizes.

    3. Since Nixon, Reagan, Bush and Bush were Hitler too, I’m curious just how the Hitlerness is conveyed from one office holder to another. Is there a military officer carrying Hitler’s life-force in a crystal who thrusts it into the heart of the president-elect just before he takes the oath of office? How exactly does that work?

      -jcr

  3. All media has abandoned any pretense of objective reporting. The fourth estate has taken it’s sides, and the respective choirs are lapping it up.

    This is not “news” by the way. Tribes gonna tribe.

    1. Absolutely. Hilarious.

      (1) Take one hysterical post from J. Sullum, whining because new items clearly labeled commentary contains commentary.

      (2) Drop this jewel onto a bunch of snowflake pearl-clutching losers obsessed with their own victimhood – every damn one of them apparently also horrified (horrified!!) that commentary contains commentary.

      (3) The result? Mewling tears of anguished snowflake rage against “fake news”

      Because commentary contains commentary…. You can make this stuff up, people……

      1. God damn dude you cry a LOT.

        1. And in addition to the ludicrous complaint about opinion in an opinion piece, here’s something else funny: There are people actually dumb enuff to believe President Dumpster-Fire is being treated very bad by the meanie-media. Compared to what, for God’s sake?

          We’ve witnessed weeks of Trump’s buffoonish press conferences that mixed grotesque narcissism, brat-like pettiness, incomprehensible stupidity, flailing incoherence and an endless stream of pointless lies. Any other president evincing a tiny portion of that clownishness would have reaped screaming weeks of headlines. With Trump it’s just Tuesday.

          Imagine if Obama bragged about his TV ratings while briefing the country on a national emergency? What was a minor mention in the running buffoon-show of Donald John Trump would have been lambasting hysterical-level news with him. For that matter, imagine any other president telling one-fiftieth the lies Trump does, or making a fool of himself talking about ingesting IV light or injecting disinfectant. Hell, it was a major news item when Obama wore a tan suit, or used the wrong condiment on his burger.

          Imagine if he was a non-stop freak show like Trump……

          1. To many of us Obama WAS a bigger non stop freak show than Trump. Leading from behind…..Ashamed of America………A much more polished freak show, but less honest and way more manipulative than ,shoot from the hip, Trump.

            I believe Obama told way more SIGNIFICANT LIES TOLD TO MANIPULATE AND DECEIVE than Trump has done. I have not found a single Trump lie that rises to the level of Obama’s big ones on the ACA or Benghazi. Please feel free to point out a lie from Trump that has similar significance.

            1. Uh huh. I’d doubt even you believe the bullshit you’re peddling. Then again, a ravenous appetite for bullshit is probably Top Requirement for remaining a Trump supporter. After all, if you’re idiot to believe Mexico would pay for the wall, or DJT would balance the budget with his tax cuts, or China was paying the tariffs, or windmills cause cancer, or Trump won the popular vote, or he has a better cheaper replacement plan for the ACA, or the server is in Ukraine, or Trump prevented nuclear war with North Korea, or saved millions of lives with his Coronavirus response, or his proposals protect patients with preexisting conditions (as opposed to eliminating that very protection) – or any more of scores upon scores of crude lies – then you’re stupid enough to believe anything.

              Congratulations !! You’re idiot enough to be a Trump supporter. You’ve earned the title Dupe of Dupes, with the ensuing obligation to bullshit frantically each new time your hero embarrasses you.

              (And we all know how often that is)

              1. “Then again, a ravenous appetite for bullshit is probably Top Requirement for remaining a Trump supporter.”

                Not sure about Trump supporters needing it, but you’re here shoveling it by the bushel, fucking lefty ignoramus.

                1. Let’s deal with another irony here. One of the stories prompting Sullum’s whine-fest is an account of Trump’s braggart lying on the coronavirus. Please explain why that’s supposed to be objectionable?

                  Everybody agrees Trump is a braggart liar, even his pathetic supporters. For them it’s partially to excuse DJT’s lying in general, but they also claim to find it “cute” – like those parents who smile indulgently as their brat-child acts up, while everyone else around them are silently grinding their teeth.

                  So everybody (and I mean EVERYBODY ) agrees Trump is a braggart liar. So explain why the hell reporters shouldn’t write on the fact? You see this a lot from the snowflakes of TrumpWorld. The more their baby-man misbehaves, the more it’s “unfair” to describe his words and deeds. Guess what : Trump has not saved “millions of lives” from coronavirus. If any other president lied so egregiously he would be be excoriated. Trump does it and we’re supposed to avert our eyes? Just because he has the mind of a child?

                  That may be what Sullum is pushing. That may be what the cultists require to maintain their bruised dignity. But it’s not a restriction normal people have to follow…….

              2. The commissar would like you to work harder, npc #5635

          2. Why lie? The very point of this article was that those were not opinion pieces those were news columns by regular reporters.

            Why do you lie? Well, for the same reason birds tweet. It’s what they do.

            1. Sigh. It’s like I’m dealing with children. Tell me, James K. Polk, when you see something labeled “political memo,” or “content analysis” what do you expect?

              (1) Just-facts-Maam- reporting….

              (2) Or a reporter’s opinion on events.

              Now maybe you’ve never looked at a newspaper your entire benighted life and honestly don’t know any better. Maybe you can’t answer such a simple question. But I guarantee our Jacob Sullum doesn’t have your excuse. He’s just feeding you a load of B.S. red meat, assuming you’re gullible enough to gobble it up.

            2. I don’t want to pile-on, Mr. Polk – so will leave you with one final hint:

              Whenever a hunk of newsprint has some clever little title – such as “political memo”, it is something different than straight news reporting. Because straight news reports aren’t given clever little titles.

              Now ask yourself why Sullum didn’t explain that to you. Why was it up to me to help you out?

        2. It only counts as one cry if he doesnt stop.

    2. Hannah T. ANderson paycheck was for 1500 dollars… All i did was simple online work from comfort at home for 3-4 hours/day that I got from this agency I discovered over the internet and they paid me for it 95 bucks every hour… More Details

  4. The New York Times aside, I do think that Trump is showing signs of mental health issues. He’s always been a narcissist, but it’s to a degree now that is not healthy. Maybe it’s the current 24/7 press conference going on, but it seems that way to me.

    Time for Pence to invoke the 25th?

    1. Really? If Pence did invoke the 25th, what would the “press” do?
      They would face the choice of admitting they were all full on TDS sufferers, of admitting they were full on fascists.
      Not a pretty choice.
      “The only thing worse than being paranoid is finding out you aren’t”.

      1. Just because you’re paranoid doesn’t mean they’re not out to get you.

    2. I have seen this tactic spreading across the left media. When the senility attacks on Biden started gaining traction, it seems that someone got their feelings hurt. I’ve noticed in the last week there have been many articles and many more comments to this effect.

      Trump has been holding hours-long news conferences with an exceedingly hostile press Corps on a daily basis on highly technical topics. He has spoken extemporaneously for many hours over that time. There have been many moments that could be exploited to ridicule him. Most of those were unfair spin.. but they did exist.

      But nowhere in there was there a Biden-esque dementia-laden word salad.

      Idiot was a defensible insult. Rude, crass, impolitic….. all defensible insults.

      But this kindergarten level “nuh-uh…you are!!” is not really defensible. Nobody is going to buy this one.

      1. Brandy is a eunuch level thinker.
        Pigeons are more insightful

    3. Time for Pence to invoke the 25th?

      Nah, if being a massive narcissist was grounds for invoking the 25th then almost every president since the passing of the 25th probably should have had it invoked on them.

      Paranoid delusions might be grounds, but it’s not paranoia if they really are out to get to you, and in the case of the media at least, I think there’s evidence to suggest the NY Times et al really are out to get him.

      1. The New York Times publicly announced that they were out to get Trump as soon as he received the Republican nomination:

        https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/business/balance-fairness-and-a-proudly-provocative-presidential-candidate.html

    4. wait you’re a parody now?

    5. You don’t think Obama or the Clintons were full blown narcissists? Hell, almost all politicians are, by definition. Bush Jr might get a pass, since he seemed to have much to be modest about, but that’s just being snarky.

      1. Anyone with undead brain should realize this simple truth.

      2. I never said they weren’t. I saw enough as it is without you imagining stuff I never said.

        1. No, you just implied it

          1. Look, a lot of people just learned the word “narcissist” recently, and they’ve been assured it makes them look intelligent and interesting when applied to Trump.
            Unfortunately, it’s just embarrassing for them outside the progressive echo chamber

            1. The funniest thing is how fucking stupidly they apply it to Trump.
              Look at dumbass Brandy. He mentions the press conferences, love of attention, etc.
              You know what Brandy and the other nitwits seem to consistently miss?
              Trump has made a literal brand of his name.
              You’d think these people with so much psychological “insight” might mention that when they talk about this concept they’re way too fucking stupid to understand – but they’re far too stupid, like brandy, to understand what the hell they’re even talking about

    6. Time for Pence to invoke the 25th?
      Right. Then Pelosi impeaches Pence for not investigating Ukraine corruption.
      Then Pelosi becomes president.
      Then the house confirms Rodham as vice president.
      Then Pelosi commits arkancide when her body is found inside her freezer full of ice cream.
      Then Rodham becomes president.
      Then Braindeadbuck gets to slurp out of Rodham’ s colostomy bag.

      1. Fuck. I got really excited for a moment.

        Then I realized you typed “Rodham”, not “Rodman”.

        Also: “arkancide”. Well put.

    7. “Trump is showing signs of mental health issues … time … to invoke the 25th?”

      If you think that Pence and the cabinet — it’s not solely up to the VP — are going to do this you might have some mental health issues of your own. And if you think that 2/3 of congress will go along with it you might actually be insane.

  5. Did the Times count all the first person references in his predecessor’s speeches, or how many times blame was not accepted for administration mistakes?

    The NYTimes has moved deeply into Fox News opinion programming territory. By frequently descending into the muck with Trump they become no better than him. Any pretense of credibility is completely lost, and I wager not just with Trump supporters.

    1. IN other words, never wrestle with a pig; you just get dirty, and the pig likes it.

    2. CNN, the New York Times, and the Washington Post passed ‘Fox News’ levels of opinion ‘journalism’ and went full Daily Kos a long time ago.

      Fox News opinion skews conservative, but their news coverage is pretty ‘fair and balanced’, and they at least try to keep a firewall between their news and opinion divisions, which is why you don’t see Tucker Carlson or Sean Hannity anchoring their election coverage, for example.

      MSNBC is like a left-wing caricature of what the Left believes about Fox.

      1. 10 years ago you could sample cable news to get the lay of the land. Now CNN and MSDNC are so far out to lunch they’re not remotely watchable unless you enjoy mental self abuse.

        1. CNN doesn’t really have news anymore except for disaster coverage, they’re just a 24-hour orange man bad talk show. I remember when you could turn on CNN and get an interesting sampling of national, regional, and international news. Remember that?

          Essentially all news outlets have abandoned objectivity, Fox included. The reason is simple: preaching to the choir is where the viewership and hence the money is. The NYT knows their readership are to the left and they don’t dare write anything that contradicts the core narrative.

      2. Anecdotally, several months ago CNN had convinced my wife that the U.S. was about to go nuclear with N. Korea.-no kidding, WWIII shooting war complete with mushroom clouds.

        Few months later, DJT steps foot in N.Korea. That was the eye opener for her.

        1. Then it was WwIII with Iran and now it WW? With C-19. When will the rest open their minds

    3. I would object to this characterization, only because FOX has never been remotely as one sided as media outlets on the left. Moderately conservative, yes, but one sided? Nah. They caught hell for being off the reservation, not for establishing their own reservation.

      Their slogan, “Fair and balanced”, is a bit of a stretch, but only a stretch, not a freaking joke. They’ve never been remotely as far right as CNN is left.

      1. Hell, Chris Wallace is one of their big shots – and he’s definitely a leftist.
        Just watch his interviews with Ds vs Rs

  6. Media companies need the Chinese market for their expensive movies and theme parks. They know not to piss off the CCP.

    I wonder how many ‘journalists’ have PR or media ‘consulting’ contracts with Chinese entities. If said entity has a fig leaf of distance from the Chinese government, your industry is dying, and everyone knows your real job is holding Republicans accountable, why not?

    I wonder how many Credentialed Experts with Mathematical Models have under the table Chinese research grants or consulting contracts. Getting a disease model that shuts down the US would be the best $500,000 Chinese intelligence ever spent.

    1. I am reminded that the king of musical Velveeta, Kenny G, had his picture taken with some Chinese dissidents several years back and this went on social media. Of course the bulk of his current income comes from the “middle kingdom [I understand you cannot take a bullet train without being regaled with endless recordings of “Going Home”]. When the CCP told him to take down that post, he complied PDQ.

      1. Concentration camps, social credit scores, and billing families for the killing bullet’s bad enough, but Kenny G playing on every train? That’s brutal.

  7. ENB hardest hit.

  8. “Two recent New York Times stories raise the question of whether the paper any longer makes a distinction between news and opinion when it comes to covering Donald Trump.”

    Really? Just two? And ‘recent stories’?
    Jacob, my friend, where have you been the last half a decade or so?

    1. They had a story about Augusta National Golf Club on the front page 3-4 times a week for a month or two when they were trying to force them to be more Socially Just. That was over a decade ago

  9. You really don’t have to read the tea leaves on this one. Remember when the Russia collaboration story fell apart? Their news editor had an all-hands-on-deck meeting. He said that there 2 year focus on Russia had failed to get rid of Trump, so they needed to find a new story for that purpose. Presumably, the 1619 effort was the result of that search.

    Remember, this was The Newsroom and the News editors. Not the opinion section.

    1. “All the news that fits, we print”

    2. 1619 has a longer term focus than Trump; It’s part of the effort to discredit the Constitution so there won’t be a revolt when (not if) they try to ditch it.

  10. Journalism requires the media to tell the truth.

    Propaganda suffers from no such requirement.

  11. You don’t need “both sides” when you have objectivity. Objectively, Trump is a crass buffoon. Anything stating such isn’t up for debate. It is what it is.

    You should probably be outraged by the fact that it is such instead of the person/org stating it. If you want better coverage, tell the idiot to be better.

    1. Smart people can be appear to be crass buffoons.

    2. You don’t need “both sides” when you have objectivity empty-headed submissiveness to the far left..

      FTFY

    3. I don’t think there’s anyone who would disagree that he’s “crass.” The issue is how much people care about that.

      When you call someone a “buffoon,” though, you have to ask how we’re defining a buffoon, because there’s room for disagreement.

    4. The real fear of the “left” is that the possibility that Orange Man Bad will have another four years to wreck their hopes and dreams.

      Just imagine another hundred or so federal judges vetted by FEDSOC? A super majority of constitutionalists on the USSC, the 9th Circuit no longer a reliable source of progressive policy decisions?

      That shit could really stick, no?

      1. Of all the things POTUS Trump will do, the restoration of the Judiciary is at the top of the list. At least, it is for me. As of today, POTUS Trump has appointed:

        51 of 180 circuit court judges (28% of total). Two are on deck.
        138 of 680 district court judges (20% of total). Forty on deck.

        There is no going back. The Judiciary is permanently altered. More than anything, I know this bugs the shit out of uber-libs. Which makes me smile a little more.

    5. Agreed, Trump is a crass buffoon. But the important question is: are his policy ideas better or worse than his predecessor?

      1. That is the question. I think he is mishandling the current crisis, but would Hillary have handled it better? No way. It would still be a clusterfuck. And I hate some of Trump’s policies, but many I like. He just pisses me off because he lies about stupid stuff and his cult like supporters drink the cool aid. Scyllia or Charbydos?

  12. Do you think the Fake News media lines up to be Trump’s punching bag because they’re stupid or because they don’t believe Trump’s adage about there being no such thing as bad publicity? Do you think Trump gives the Fake News media so many opportunities to make him a punching bag because he’s stupid or because he doesn’t believe his own adage about there being no such thing as bad publicity?

    It’s a symbiotic relationship about as scripted as any WWE feud. Trump talks shit about the media because he knows it gets his fans riled up, the media highlights Trump’s shit-talking for the same reason, and they both know the shit-talking is good for business on both sides. You’re an idiot if you haven’t figured out that journalism’s primary job is to sell advertising rather than speaking truth to power or whatever they try to bullshit you into believing their holy calling is and Trump sells a lot of advertising.

    1. Lot of truth in this observation. Both sides engage in hyperbole, the problem the media has is Trump is better at it and with their poll numbers worse than Trump’s they are losing the battle with him among the people that matter.

    2. They do it because they are true believers and so are the remnants of their customer base. (ergo the inability to tack back to center without losing the customers they have left).

      I think the ‘they’re just selling advertising’ angle is somewhat true, because media has been defining conventional wisdom for a long time, but the concentration of media in the big cities and overall decline of the industry has caused the media to become a coastal cities echo chamber in general.

      The solution will happen on its own. The dissonance between what I’m reading on yahoo when I check my email, for instance, (ie. we are entering the next depression! the food supply is threatened! Chrissy Teagan has been body shamed!) and real life (stock market has rocketed, people are starting to be ok going outside again, trying to stay positive) just get more and more pronounced.

  13. Is Sullum just noticing this? Better late than never.

  14. Two recent years of New York Times stories raise the question of whether the paper any longer makes a distinction between news and opinion when it comes to covering Donald Trump.

    FTFY (and still being very generous to the NYT).

  15. The New York Times is reporting from and for the educated, modern mainstream.

    Clingers will dislike this, much as they dislike any objective, reason- and science-based analysis.

    1. “Objective” = getting Democrats elected
      “Reason” = because it’s their turn
      “Science” = taking things (money, property, silly fundamental rights) from icky religious rural folks

    2. You provide constant insults but little content in your remarks. In the articles cited by Sullum, do they or do they not veer heavily into opinion at the expense of objective reporting?

  16. As long as I’ve been aware, NYT has always blurred the line between reporting and opinion. That is what their readers seem to want.

    1. They just want to be told what the sophisticated people are thinking these days… so they know what to think.

  17. I do think that Trump only makes things worse on himself with sophomoric behavior and lack of discipline. I try to tell myself to judge his actions and not his words, but its difficult. I guess the upside is that we get a ringside seat to his circus.

    1. And then the media take the bait and print something even stupider than Trump’s original stupid. The perpetually aggrieved like NYT’s writers who see life primarily as an opportunity to virtue signal go apeshit when he trolls them. You don’t have to be a Trump fan to marvel at his ability to turn allegedly ” educated, smart” people into out of control, drooling morons. Artie Poo being an exemplary case. At least it provides some comic relief in pretty dire days regarding personal liberty.

  18. They’re not the enemy of Trump, they’re the enemy of America, and have been since Walter Duranty was lying and propagandizing on behalf of Stalin and the Bolsheviks.

    1. I can not hear the name Duranty anymore without thinking of “the cruel mathematics” of the Swiss in Hell on Wheels.

  19. White House press secretary Kayleigh McEnany says President Trump will hold a news conference Monday evening at the same time as a coronavirus task force briefing had been scheduled and then canceled.

    Oh good. TBH, having Dear Leader talk about his medical advice has been kind of a disaster. He’ll be much better telling megacorp CEOs how great they are Celebrity Apprentice-style. That’s his wheelhouse.

    1. The best part is watching you left wing fucktards get all butt hurt over Trump. He truly knows how to fist your asshole and listen to you squeal like a pig, boy.

      1. He just likes having someone to hate whole-heartedly.

      2. Trump, seemingly without effort, has lefty assholes like commie kid dancing 24/7.

  20. “Two recent New York Times stories raise the question of whether the paper any longer makes a distinction between news and opinion when it comes to covering Donald Trump.”

    Between news and opinion? The NYT abandoned news long ago. Now it’s more like between opinion and propaganda.

  21. The desperate incompetents of the NYT have long ago forsaken, reporting by abandoning the facts, integrity, objectivity and moral comprehension…..Should they go belly up…MEH!

  22. Carol M. Cipolla, published what he recognized as humanity’s greatest existential threat: Stupidity. “No matter how many idiots you suspect yourself surrounded by, you are invariably low-balling the total.” – Curious, has that thought ever crossed your mind when reading this?

  23. Trump = bad
    Media used to be ok, but to beat Trump, they have formed a new strategy.
    They become Trump
    So it’s Trump vs Media Trump
    It’s very sad to see that media became Trump.
    It’s also very sad to see Democrat became Trump
    So we have no vision, the only goal is to beat real Trump, but in the process you become Trump
    Who is worse?

    1. Lol
      “Trump is the prime mover. The alpha and the omega. All that is, is because Trump. The world was created in 2015”
      You’re psychotic enough to not realize this is what you’re saying, and dishonest enough that you’ll never understand what the Trump phenomenon really reveals

  24. Also, I have been paying for NYT for more than a year
    Because there is actually NO information from NYT, I tried to cancel.
    And it took 2 days to cancel. It is most unpleasant experience, and I would not pay for NYT for a long time. Be a newspaper, provide information useful to people. Then I may come back.

  25. Hey if Reason is starting to notice this, than maybe the reasonable left wingers are too?

  26. It is easy to distinguish opinion from news at the NYT. If it has a byline, it is opinion; if not it is news.

  27. “Two recent New York Times stories raise the question of whether the paper any longer makes a distinction between news and opinion when it comes to covering Donald Trump.”

    *Recent*?!
    Ha, and ha.

  28. So, if Fox is the Cracker Barrel of news, then what is the NY Times/

    1. Dennys?
      Applebee’s?

      I don’t know, all 3 are garbage

  29. When It Comes to Covering Trump, The New York Times Has Abandoned Any Distinction Between Reporting and Opinion

    Dude, this ain’t a Trump thing. They did this way back during the Clinton presidency. Clinton, Bush Jr, Obama, now Trump. If he has a D after his name their opinion is he’s the greatest thing ever, an R makes him the devil incarnate.

  30. My god why does anyone care with the NYT writes? They are a very provencal NYC mostly far left/boshevik type paper. the paper reads like a communist rag in Vienna in 1925. Seriously their owners are the classic socialist lefties from central/eastern Europe who are still holding grudges from the old world (which is why they supported ethnic cleanings deniers when their fellow travelers like Troysky were killing millions in Ukraine and Poland). The lack of diversity at the paper is staggering. Come on owners..hire some libertarians..and perhaps a few Catholics/Italians/Irish…you know the kind of folks you drip with contempt for…

    1. Because they and the other rag the WaPo still set the tone for what stories broadcast news leads with.

      They do still reach millions.

  31. When working against a fully funded propaganda organization[Foxnews] it sometimes helps to learn from your opponent

    Of course, Fox makes no representation of actually telling the truth[on the air or in court] where the Times still makes that a priority

  32. There is nothing wrong with advocacy or opinion journalism (I do it all the time!), as long as it is intellectually honest and explicitly identified as such.

    ^This. BTW, Unreason might want to look at their intellectual honesty.

    Yeah…I’m looking at you Brown, Binion, Boehm, Dalmia. No prizes for intellectual honesty in that quartet.

  33. Why is the NYT a target when cable news has been at it for years? News is entertainment. What the political sponsored news found out years ago was they could increase entertainment value by adding their opinions. In today’s world, its entertainment value first to attract ad dollars then the news second. But the scam is that political sponsored sites call themselves news and then just add a flavor of news, mostly political. Not many robberies, car crashes, or people working for the good of society are reported because the message is about political division and not solving political problems. That’s why most political discourse today starts as opponents and not people looking for societal solutions.

  34. > it must abandon the notion that what it does is fundamentally different from what Fox News does,

    The difference is that Fox literally lies about things the producers know to be true.

    1. Faux News!

      What the heck do you think the old hag networks ABCNBCCBS (they may as well be one entity) do?

      Tell the truth?

      I love how much Fox gets dumped on but we’ve seen the behavior allegedly attached to them play out for years with broadcast news. Jesus, Dan Rather and Brian Williams alone should make people shut the hell up already about Fox.

      But nope. No matter how many times they’ve been caught lying no biggie.

  35. Washington Post is just as bad. It labels articles as ‘perspective’, ‘analysis’, and even ‘history’ when they are just thinly veiled criticisms of Trump.
    I don’t care for the president but I’d like to hear more news and less opinion in the media.

  36. “Trump suggested that injections of disinfectants such as bleach and isopropyl alcohol might prove to be effective treatments for COVID-19”

    For the love of God, you too Sullum?

    He didn’t suggest that. And you damn well know this or else you’re doing essentially what the Times does

  37. Now do one on the Washington Post. They manage to malign Trump even in stories that have nothing to do with politics, the ‘rona, etc.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.