New York Times

A Conservative Purge at The New York Times Will Only Hurt The New York Times

If conservatives don't like The New York Times, they don't have to read it. Unlike in the not-so-distant past, you now have endless media options.

|

The biggest news story from last week has nothing to do with spiking coronavirus rates or U.S. sanctions on communist China in the wake of its crackdown on Hong Kong protesters. The blockbuster news, according to some conservative publications and my social media feed, is that a center-right columnist at the left-leaning New York Times tendered her resignation.

My immediate, embarrassing thought after reading about Bari Weiss' travails at "The Gray Lady" is that her widely circulated departure letter was the first thing I've ever read from her. She complained about "constant bullying by colleagues who disagree with my views," which is troubling. I'm usually against washing dirty laundry in public, but her missive raised relevant points about media bias.

I've written opinion pieces for the Times without pushback, but have experienced enough (mostly funny) incidents as a libertarian journalist to understand her point. After the announcement, Fox News—an outlet that runs opinions ranging from those who adore President Trump to those who merely like him—ran a blistering column about journalism's "woke mob."

It makes sense that Tom Cotton penned the op-ed. The Times last month published his column calling for the feds to "send in the troops" to quell riots, which caused such a fracas within the newspaper that the editorial-page editor resigned. Cotton's argument was distasteful, but I would certainly have printed it given the significance of a Republican senator calling for something so draconian. The Weiss letter reinforced the point about bias.

In my years in journalism, I've never seen so many conservatives who are this upset about the media. The nation's great newspapers, John Steele Gordon wrote recently in The Wall Street Journal, "have moved away from even the pretense of political neutrality." He championed the New York Herald, which in 1835 began a tradition of balanced reporting.

That's long before our time, but I got my start in journalism in the post-Watergate era. Before then, newspapering was highly competitive as newspapers (especially in New York City), vied for readers with outrageous headlines. We can still find tabloid examples. My favorite headline from the New York Post: "Headless Body in Topless Bar."

The names of many newspapers—the Republican, Democrat and Independent—announced their biases on the masthead. The term, "yellow journalism" (referring to sensationalistic news coverage), dates to the late 1800s (and comes from a cartoon character dressed in yellow). After Woodward and Bernstein's investigation, reporters claimed to present a balanced view of an issue after sorting through the facts and talking to both sides.

Such professionalism replaced the days of cigar-chomping editors looking for salacious stories. Now, critics argue, news reporting has reverted to its more partisan past. Before you get teary-eyed about those good, old supposedly "neutral" days, think back to what they really were like— especially if you hold views that are outside the narrow mainstream. Gordon's use of the word "pretense" offers a clue.

In my Midwestern city, we had the choice of one daily newspaper. We could watch the ABC, NBC or CBS evening news programs. There was no Fox News. Talk radio was in its infancy. There was no Internet, but I used CompuServe—a basic precursor to the online services we now take for granted—on my Radio Shack computer. If you wanted to disseminate your views, you could write a letter to the editor or mimeograph a newsletter.

My frustration with bias actually propelled me into the newspaper business. I wanted to—and we can all laugh aloud at this one—make a difference. Sure, the news stories in the Daily Miracle had the patina of objectivity, as did the stories that flowed from the lips of the TV talking heads. But the most pernicious bias comes from the presuppositions that underlie any story—and from the story ideas that never get past the gatekeepers.

One could argue that modern reporting—at least in national prestige publications such as The New York Times and The Washington Posthas become less neutral. So what? Newspapers no longer are the dominant forces they had been. These days, if you don't like what newspapers offer, you can choose from hundreds of other sources—or go online and read the source documents for yourself.

The key is not expecting balance—or a pretense of balance—in every news story, but getting a balanced view from reading a variety of articles and publications. The problem now is there's so much information available that no one trusts any of it. Frankly, many people's definition of fair reporting amounts to "stories that agree with my views."

I'm not unsympathetic to Weiss' argument, but it's not a big story. It probably won't be long before you'll find her columns published elsewhere. If you don't like The New York Times, don't read it. Unlike in the not-so-distant past, you now have endless options.

This column was first published in the Orange County Register.

Advertisement

NEXT: Today in Supreme Court History: July 24, 1997

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. Like the NYT really cares if conservatives read their rag.

    1. And like there were any conservatives to purge. Barry Weis is a leftist lesbian. She is about as conservative as Chuck Schumer. She wasn’t purged because she is conservative. She was purged because she is a Jew who defends Israel. This isn’t a purge it is a progrom.

      1. Watch Bret Stephens. If he leaves, your pogrom premise is true. There is something to what you are saying, IMO.

        1. Stephens is a weird one. He will still push views counter to most of the NYT, but it seems like every X number of articles he has to toe the company line.

          1. And he usually bashes Trump, which conforms with NYT editorial policy #1, and might placate the Jacobins down the hall.

            1. Google easily work and google pays me every hour and every week just $5K to $8K for doing online work from home. I am a universty student and I work on my part time just 2 to 3 hours a day easily from home.VCx Now every one can earn extra cash for doing online home system and make a good life by just open this website and Follow instructions on this page…

              ►══════► Online Income Websites

          2. The antisemitism at NYT will drive him away. You’ll see.

      2. Hey, John…do you read The Federalist Blog?

        Since unreason has gone off the cliff with the other Lefties, I have spent my mornings checking out The Federalist as part of my news aggregation. They had one of the first stories on the FBI notes and other stories that even unreason wont cover.

        1. No but I will check it out. Didn’t the Federalist kill off their comments?

          1. They have no comments but they have some good articles.

            Declassified Documents Show FBI Used ‘Defensive’ Briefing In 2016 To Spy On Donald Trump

            I dont know the whole backstory for The Federalist killing off comments, so if anyone knows…

            1. Google proved that fascism no longer requires actual government action.

            2. I dont know the whole backstory for The Federalist killing off comments, so if anyone knows…

              Ford complained to Google about ads showing up next to “racist” and/or “white supremacist” comments. Google approached The Federalist and ZeroHedge about the issue. NBC News somehow gets wind and breaks the story that Google is demonetizing and/or deprioritizing the sites. Google denies the ban, The Federalist and ZeroHedge shutter their comments section entirely. And nothing else happened.

          2. yeah, they were forced to by google in order to remain on line. Honestly not a huge loss considering it was mostly leftist trolls reeing and everyone else telling the trolls to go fuck themselves, but it’s very disturbing to see google wield that sort of power. Especially since the only reason google didn’t ban their monetization entirely (which was what they were trying to do originally) is because they realized it would allow Trum to bring the hammer down.

            1. It is also disturbing that that happened because a division of NBC News was lobbying Google to get The Federalist demonetized entirely. Apparently because they had criticized some of NBC’s reporting on COVID-19 policies.

            2. reeing? I need another English (?) lesson.

          3. The comments at federalist made Reason look like a hippy flower parade.

            But the writing is excellent for their blog. They provide primary sources for all of their articles. They are really well thought out.

            1. The articles leave me really wanting more. I have been visiting The Federalist daily for months.

            2. David Harsanyi, who used to write here when it was a libertarian publication, is over at The Federalist now. His articles are usually great, as they were here.

              1. Mollie Hemingway is terrific. Margot Cleveland has done yeoman’s work on the Flynn case.

      3. This is one of the most tone deaf articles I have seen in the last month. It is perhaps telling that Greenhut looked at last week and said “there go those conservatives complaining about bias again!”

        Greenhut sets up a scenario where Conservatives are lamenting the purge of conservatives. How many conservatives were in the Harper’s letter, Greenhut?

        This isn’t about conservative bias at the Times, it is about the rise of the West’s own Cultural Revolution. It started as the “Outrage Culture” and has metastasized as the “Cancel Culture”. Conservatives have been bitching about the cancel culture for years (Though there was a great article in the Times a few years ago about Justine Sacco), but the real story last week was about some prominent liberals finally waking up and realizing that this thing has become dangerous.

        The story wasn’t that Weiss was the last “conservative” to leave, but that the employees at the newspaper didn’t disagree, but rather actively hounded her and others like her out of the company for wrong think.

        1. Yeh it was a big ‘Whoosh’.

        2. “The story wasn’t that Weiss was the last “conservative” to leave”

          She wasn’t a conservative at all. She claims she is Left leaning.

        3. I read “can only hurt The Times” and my first thought was, Hey! How can I pile on???

      4. Oh, you mean because nobody in mainstream media or Congress is allowed to voice support for Israel?

      5. “Barry Weis is a leftist lesbian.”

        Who is Barry Weis, you half-educated, bigoted, disaffected culture war casualty?

        1. Who indeed? Barry Weiss? Mama and Papa Weiss’s little boy Barry?

      6. Lesbian as in she “likes to fool around with girls” or lesbian as in motorcycle dyke? Is Bari single?

    2. There are no Conservatives that work at any of the MSM propaganda outlets.

      There are no Libertarians that work at unreason.

      Of course, Greenhut blithely believing the story that the Yeti-Conservative worked at NYT, is laughable.

      1. Reason still publishes content from Stossel. That’s about all they have left.

        1. Ronald Bailey is at least a Rationalist if not a hard line Libertarian. His arguments are generally based upon evidence, not on the opinions of the cocktail circuit.

          1. He’s also a transhumanist, so not sure how ‘rational’ he is.

            1. transhumanism is the logical (and rational) end state of libertarian philosophy. If you own your own body (which you do), you are free to attempt to augment it however you like.

              1. Advocating for laws against, or using force to stop transhumanism would be non-libertarian. Noting that, as it tends towards being Utopian, it is stupid and foolish and not very rational either.

                1. I mean, I’m all for swinging for the fences. Just don’t think that’s what gets you into the Big League.

          2. hard line Libertarian

            Huh? The guy routinely declares things that are not public commons to be part of the public commons and then shrugs and says, “Tragedy of the commons, whaddyagonna do?”

            He advocated for mandatory vaccinations against diseases that don’t kill people.

            Not sure which libertarian hard line he’s towing but it’s not property or NAP. As others skirt around, I think he’s libertarian when it supports his utopian ideas of transhumanism and less so when the reality of individuals, or just reality, stands in the way of his utopia.

      2. There are no Libertarians that work at unreason.

        Of course not. I’m the only real libertarian and I don’t work there.

        1. You ain’t me. So ain’t nothing libertarian about you, commie.

    3. They should care with dwindling circulation.

      1. House bailouts, baby. Bailouts.

        Lefties will do anything to avoid moral hazard.

        1. But they will have to fit the WaPo for the “official voice of the Democratic Party” banner. And dollars.

      2. They don’t need a circulation when the only reason they’re still open is because a billionaire needed another mouthpiece. As long as a few Congress critters read it, that’s all that matters. Sure, that’s some expensive lobbying but it has the added weight of appearing to be an independent opinion.

        It’s easier to buy legitimacy than earn it, it would seem.

    4. Getting paid every month easily more than $15k just by doing simple job online. Last month i have exactly received $16839 from this online job just by giving this 2 hrs a day online. Now everybody on this earth can get this job and start earning more cash online just by follow instructions here……..for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lotCopy Here………>>  Click for full details 

      1. Wow, just like a NYT reporter!

    5. It’s misdirection. The issue is not conservatives declining to read the NYT. It’s that NYT readers are living in an ever more leftist echo chamber.

      1. even articles with comments have the comments closed quickly, so non-subscribers are less likely to weigh in when they find an objectionable article

    6. Make 6,000 dollar to 8,000 dollar A Month Online With No Prior Experience Or Skills Required. Be Your Own Boss AndChoose Your Own Work Hours.Thanks A lot Here>>>ReadMore.

      1. And another NYT reporter staff position ad!

    7. Maybe they’ll care once revenue dwindles? Btw this is why I no longer like Reason: lazy journalism. “Fox News—an outlet that runs opinions ranging from those who adore President Trump to those who merely like him.” Steven must have never watched Gregg Gutfield, who like many others is sarcastic and openly makes fun of Trump. The other sign of laziness/stupidity is using phrases like “one could argue.”

    8. ●▬▬▬▬PART TIME JOBS▬▬▬▬▬●

      I am making $165 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience masses freedom now that i’m my non-public boss. that is what I do……
      ↓↓↓↓COPY THIS SITE↓↓↓↓

      HERE► Only Click Here For Full Details

    9. ●▬▬▬▬PART TIME JOBS▬▬▬▬▬●

      I am making $165 an hour working from home. i was greatly surprised at the same time as my neighbour advised me she changed into averaging $ninety five however I see the way it works now. I experience masses freedom now that i’m my non-public boss. that is what I do…… ↓↓↓↓

      COPY THIS SITE↓↓↓↓ HERE► Only Click Here For Full Details

    10. STAY HOME AND STARTING WORK AT HOME EASILY… MORE AND MORE EARNING DAILY BY JUST FOLLOW THESE STEPS, I am a student and i work daily on this site and earn money..Go this site home media tech tab for more details thanks you.CLICK HERE══════► USA TODAY  

    11. This is all very old news… does anyone still trust the old brown queer.

  2. If you don’t like The New York Times, don’t read it.

    Or you can read it and complain incessantly in the comments. Oh, you can’t. They’ll ban you. Guess you better go to Reason and complain incessantly in their comments, since they are too damn kind to ban bitches and moaners like, well, you know who you are.

    1. Or they can do like the Washington Post, and not allow comments on stories that don’t fit the narrative.

    2. Good ole reliable White Knight.

        1. The hangover will be over soon buddy.

          1. You think I’d be listening to Ministry if I had a hangover? Dude…

            1. Fine, you win. Hair of the dog. 3 more days until you have to work again. Guessing we should expect another “I was hacked” post on Monday.

              1. If you see posts from this handle over the weekend, it’s probably not me. No I wasn’t hacked. Tulpa or Mary or whoever was using my screen name. There is a difference. But I’m sure you know that since you’re so amazingly intelligent and I’m a rube rolling in the dirt.

                1. “There is a difference”

                  Is there? I’ve never seen anything but garbage from your screen name no matter the day.

              2. Oh, and I applaud your clairvoyance for knowing my work schedule and everything! I bet you even know when I take a shit! You’re so awesome!

                1. I actually dont care what you do either way. Was hoping you were a functional alcoholic, but maybe you arent. Not my business.

            2. People don’t listen to Ministry, it’s an affectation.
              Just like middle age lawyers in leathers at Sturgis, or teenage girls at a punk concert.

            3. It depends. Are you listening to With Sympathy?

    3. Guess you better go to Reason and complain incessantly in their comments, since they are too damn kind to ban bitches and moaners like, well, you know who you are.

      The utter lack of self awareness is mind boggling yet no less hilarious for it. I remember when the bumper sticker slogan you used to regurgitate had something to do with tolerance demanding that we not tolerate intolerance. It’s truly delightful how badly and thoroughly Trump has broken you.

    4. They’ll ban you. Guess you better go to Reason and complain incessantly in their comments, since they are too damn kind to ban bitches and moaners like, well, you know who you are.

      From what I’ve seen people are exceedingly complimentary to Reason’s comment section, frequently noting that the content is better than the articles.

      1. True story.

        1. For a while forumites even had to tell people to RTFA, which they wouldn’t do, so they generally gave up telling them to.

    5. Yes, we know who you are Sarc.

    6. Yahoo News shut down all their comments yesterday. Kind of waiting to see what they come back with. ESPN shut down their comments years ago, and I hardly go there anymore. CBS Sport shut theirs down too, I left. Reason deserves praise for allowing commenters to comment freely.

    7. Q: When do Reason’s supposed libertarians conclude criticism is out of line?

      A: Whenever a leftist institution is the target.

      Completely understandable.

  3. they are too damn kind to ban bitches and moaners like, well,

    You? Or is your bitching different?

    1. Do you see me bitching about liberal bias, TDS from the authors, neglecting stories that I feel to be important, and other insults to the people who are kind enough to provide this forum?

      1. No, you just butch about anyone that has a more informed opinion than you and doesnt push the ongoing narratives. Independent thought seems to make you cry for some reason.

        I do love the continued sanctimonious act from you though.

        1. anyone that has a more informed opinion than you

          And who might that be, Jesse?

          1. For you virtually anyone. For sarcasmic basically anyone but you or DoL.

            1. Because you’re so enlightened that everyone basks in the glow of your amazingness! *swoon*

              1. Lol. Yes, the paradigm of good behavior is tut tutting others here.

                You are so self unaware.

                1. Don’t argue the point! Argue the person! Turnabout! You’re so awesome! *swoon*

                  1. Did you see your first comment this morning? Lol.

                  2. This may be the most hypocritical comment I’ve read all week.

                  3. “Don’t argue the point! Argue the person! ”

                    Where’s Tulpa when you actually need him?

              2. He doesn’t have to be particularly enlightened. Relative to you and Pedo Jeffy, the bar is set very low.

        2. Your thoughts are so deep that I’m afraid I’ll drown if I attempt to fathom them. *swoon*

          1. You came into a thread to bitch about other posters without prodding.

            You’re truly a moral figure for us all to replicate.

            1. I point out that people like you come here for no reason other than to insult the magazine, the authors, and the readers, and I’m the bitch? Haaaa ha ha ha ha! I mean, so deep and enlightened!

              1. Yes. You’re the bitch. You were the 2nd post in a thread and you cried about future imagined comments.

                Then you cry when people call your bitch post out for what it was.

                It is actually very amusing.

                Half the time you cry about posters, you were the first one to have actually insulted someone. That is the hilarious thing about it.

                1. That “whoosh” sound is my point going over your amazingly intelligent, yet totally dense, head.

                  1. Special pleading is almost like a point. That “whoosh” sound was your credibility going down the toilet along with your last round of rotgut.

                  2. It didn’t. He’s just calling you on your usual bullshit.

                  3. Time to fuck off for a bit Sarc. Your posts have become the equivalent of angry stuttering.

              2. Oh come now. Jesse does such a good job parroting right-wing talking points, he has to be getting paid for his efforts. I mean, who would be that much of a pathetic bootlicking sycophant *for free*?

                1. He’s probably running like ten handles and stuff because there’s no possible way multiple people could listen to Hannity and chew gum at the same time, you know?

                  1. My image of Jesse is this 70 year old retired guy in Arizona with literally nothing else to do in his day so he spends all his time reading right-wing web sites, watching right-wing TV, listening to right-wing radio, and scrolling through his right-wing Facebook feed. He consumes all of these different media sources so he considers himself “well informed” – just look at the sheer numbers of information sources he consulted! When his family visits him, and Jesse goes off on some right-wing rant about how “librulz are destroying the country”, his family members just pat him on the head and remind him to take his medicine. It must be a real treat to spend Thanksgiving dinner with Jesse.

                    1. Your imagination is as wrong as most of your posts.

                      You and sarcasmic think anyone right if Pelosi is a Fox sycophant.

                      Not all of us rely on Voxplanations.

                    2. Well, I admit, I could be wrong about your family patting you on the head. Who am I kidding, they’re probably just as big of right wing nut jobs as you are. So they’ll probably join in with your right wing rants.

                      And anyone to the left of Ted Cruz is a librul godless America-hating progressive, amirite?

                    3. LMFAO. You have never posted a link in your entire life that you didn’t cop from DU, HuffPo, or Bleeding Heart Libertarians. AMC does less projecting than you do. Thanks for living up to the stereotype that leftists are all Alinksyite retards who do nothing but accuse others of what they themselves are doing.

                    4. And anyone to the left of Ted Cruz is a librul godless America-hating progressive, amirite?

                      Self-described Marxists aren’t Marxists though. Always remember that.

                    5. Pedo Jeffy, you’re just mad because you get called out for your sophist bullshit, dishonesty, use of socks, and your enthusiasm for child rape.

                    6. This is rich coming from the guy who does nothing but regurgitate stuff he read on Vox and pseudoscience from RationaleWiki.

              3. “and I’m the bitch?”

                Hey you are teachable.

      2. No we don’t. That is because you are stupid. What is your point ?

        1. Is this the real John or an impostor?

        2. Well then, fuck you and fuck the beer I said I would get you at the end of the day. I’m lumping you with JesseAz, Nardz, Sevo, and the other conservatards. Lick my balls.

          1. John is definitely starting to down the fascist path.

            https://reason.com/2020/07/20/feds-send-outside-agitators-to-escalate-conflict-in-portland/#comment-8357109

            John
            July.20.2020 at 10:25 am
            Fine, get rid of the cops. I know a ton of people, myself included, who would be happy to go to Portland and settle this issue and would if the threat of prison were not on the table. But when we do, we will show up at the next BLM Antifa riot and will be shooting back. And when we are done there will not be a BLM or Antifa thug or human shield left alive.

            We will have a peaceful society. We can have it that way or we can have it with the cops putting a stop to this. So, my advice is that you better start sucking that cop dick hard, I mean really throat it, because that big blue dick is the only thing standing between you and your antifa buddies and a bullet in your head.

            1. Lol. God this is getting fucking hilarious.

              Jeff, who literally threatened government force if people didnt wear masks so he could keep eating cookies is calling others fascists.

              Its nit the SS like riots in Portland following people home, threatening them, advocating for a form of authoritarianism as a replacement to their already far left local governments.. it is john saying we need to clamp down on those violating civil rights they have burned and assaulted that is the fascist.

              Lol.

              1. Jeff, who literally threatened government force if people didnt wear masks

                Lying liar Jesse strikes again!

                And no, John is not merely stating “prosecute people who violate rights”. He’s advocating for literal violence against the protestors. Just like our trio of confirmed fascists around here, Nardz, RRWP and Shithead. Unsurprising that you come leaping to the defense of your tribal associates. Aren’t you one of the people around here who insists we ought to treat all protestors as guilty by association with the most radical and violent protestors that exist? If you choose to associate yourself with people who advocate for literal murder and violence against protestors, what does that make you?

                1. He’s not lying. You literally said that. You literally said that mask mandates, enforced by men with guns, were legitimate because without the threat of the men with guns not enough people were wearing them voluntarily. That is what you said. You also defended self-described Marxists and defended the use of Marxist violence against police, private individuals, and private property. If you don’t like being collectivized as a Marxist, maybe you shouldn’t practice Marxist collectivism?

                  1. You literally said that mask mandates, enforced by men with guns, were legitimate

                    Never said that, “James Murphy”. But you do you.

                    1. You did say it. You’re such a lying piece of shit.

                    2. Then you can prove it, right? Oh wait you can’t, you little fascist wannabe.

                    3. You’re such a lying fuck, Jeff.
                      At least have the courage to stand behind your statements.

          2. Fight those windmills! You’re the last true libertarian here. Well you, jeff, chipper, and brandy.

            Lol.

            You literally start the opening salvo and then cry when you get a response.

            Amusing as fuck your lack of self awareness.

      3. “Do you see me bitching”

        Yes constantly.

      4. STAY AT HOME & WORK AT HOME FOR USA ►Check it out, and start earning yourself . for more info visit any tab this site Thanks a lotHere………………………ReadMore.

    2. Haven’t seen Jackand Ace since Trump was elected.

      What’s up? Where have you been?

      1. Serving 3 to 7 for felony stupid?

      2. I thought the old tag was JackandAce but I could be wrong and have reached the extent of my ability to care.

        In any event, I have noticed lots of old logins come back and I’ve seen/heard someone using a whitespace ‘hack’ to hijack login names and troll people. Seems like not all the old names are hijacked but at least a few have been.

          1. Nah I just googled: it’s jackand, not hand.

  4. Journalism isn’t looking to purge conservatives, it wants to rid itself of white men, of any political bent. But with all the white men virtually gone, white women are next. It’s just an observation, not a commentary.

    1. Its about dissent to Socialism.

      Anyone who goes against the Dogma of Socialism is to be purged. Even Lefties will be purged after they have served their usefulness.

      Hitler also gave rival Socialists a choice. Stand by Nazism or die in a Concentration camp.

      1. As the useful idiots like Nick Gillespie love to point out and then selectively ignore, even subjects under Stalin were free to choose between Stalinism or practicing ‘true socialism’ in a Gulag.

        1. Less inequality for everybody in Siberia. Life sucks for all.

      2. The Left believes only white men possess reason and therefore must go.

  5. The biggest news story from last week … Bari Weiss

    orly?

    1. How deep in the I95 media fart bubble does one have to be to actually think that is true? And how can the author not be embarrassed by that fact?

      1. John, you put your finger on something I have felt for some time now. There is a complete disconnect between DC and the rest of the country. Richard Grenell has talked a lot about this since he left government.

        1. I would be surprised if more than 1 in a hundred Americans even know who Weiss is. How could anyone think this is a big story?

          1. I would be surprised if more than 1 in a hundred Americans even know who Weiss is.

            I’m not the only one who starts humming “Can’t Get Enough Of Your Love, Babe” when they read the name “Bari Weiss”, right?

          2. It’s a big story because Bari called out the NYT for their bias and for their corporate culture. Coming from a person hired specifically to provide diversity of opinion in response to 2016 it is even more powerful.

            You can tell it hits home because it was so quickly memory-holed at WaPo, NYT, and the rest of Pravda inc.

        2. “John, you put your finger on something I have felt for some time now. ”

          I’m telling your wife!

          1. ok, i’ll give you that one. That’s funny.

          2. Sigh….LOL. I set myself up for that. Duh! 🙂

        3. It’s an annoying thing about much of our push towards all news being at the national level, truly most of it is not.

          And in the long run the lack of local news for most folks is truly to their detriment. Most of the time when things happen in NYC it’s not actually relevant to Arizona. It’s frequently the news equivalent of gawking at a traffic accident.

          There is a case to be made that federal news is relevant, but pushing everything to the federal level (as we’ve strongly trended towards in my life time. National Mask Mandates being a recent version of the vocal cries for the death of federalism) is a huge detriment. At the very least, the strong lack of local political involvement is pretty tragic.

  6. One reason to read papers like the Post is to see just how far Left they can go, and which stories they bury because they don’t fit the narrative. Some you can’t find without doing a word search, and many don’t allow comments.

    The other reason is to play with the far Lefty commenters. Point out, for example, that New York State’s Covid death rate per capita is 6.5 times higher than Florida, and you can be guaranteed a flood of excuses and Putin troll accusations.

    1. Some of the dumbest comments come from the leftist down voters of Wapo or The Hill. They have facts that you directly refute with primary sources and they will flag you and upvote the wrong information. To them narratives are facts. It is part of the turn to post modernism and critical theory. Truth is now subjective to them. As long as they “know” something it is a fact. Especially if someone else agrees they “know” it too.

    2. Seeing how the enemy thinks and operates is important but I refuse to pay them for it.

      Think about how Lefties have tried for decades to get non-Lefties to pay them for the privilege of being degraded.

      NOT ANYMORE….HAHA. Propagandist in the MSM are being laid off in droves.

      Learn how to code…bitches!

      1. Georgia has been “open” for months with us Georgians conducting regular business. 3,360 deaths as of today. Over 40 million Americans have been tested for KungFlu with only 4M infected and far less actively infected. Only 144,000 deaths in the USA.

        The MSM are traitors to the Americans way of live. Almost everything they say are lies.

        1. ^this. They’re directly supporting Chinese propaganda in some cases, a country that we’re now engaging in what is for all effects and purposes, another cold war. Someone call Mccarthy, he’s needed.

          1. I guarantee that the ChiCommies have infiltrated US Academia just like the Russian Commies did.

            All these SJW attempts smell like Commie pushes to destroy America just like the Russian Commies tried.

            The media acting like America is a rotten apple of racism and hatred but gives the Commies in China a complete pass. You know the MSM is rotten to its core.

    3. Point out, for example, that New York State’s Covid death rate per capita is 6.5 times higher than Florida, and you can be guaranteed a flood of excuses and Putin troll accusations.

      So… exactly like here? Strange.

  7. Frankly, many people’s definition of fair reporting amounts to “stories that agree with my views.”

    And that is the problem with the incessant bitching about “media bias” particularly from the right. If there are no media outlets that even attempt to discover the real truth behind a story, where does that leave us? It leaves us with Fox News and MSNBC each blaring out their narratives with only half of the facts, and very few who are truly informed enough to make a reasoned decision.

    I don’t think that NYT or WaPo do a great job at trying to tell a story from multiple perspectives, but at least they give it a go. Will they write articles that frame Republicans in a negative light? Yes. Will they open their articles giving prominence to the left-wing point of view and then offer the right-wing rebuttal only down on paragraph 15? Yes, they do. But at least it’s there. Where will you find the sincere, straightforward left-wing rebuttal to any story published at Fox News? Or vice-versa, at MSNBC? Nowhere, because it’s not there.

    If we continue down this same path, then the real casualty here will be the truth. Instead we will only have narratives that are constructed to feed individuals’ pre-existing biases. It will only reinforce those biases instead of serve to free individuals from the imprisonment of bias. Where does that lead us? Not to a happy place.

    1. Fox news has more liberal commentators than MSNBC or WaPo. WaPo pretends Rubun is a conservative. Fox actually has liberals on.

      Virtually every study on the media confirms this.

      Oddly missing from your diatribe is a news outlet that produces full unedited primary sources. I shouldnt find that strange, yet you seem to be consistent with that. When a media outlet doesnt produce a full source, like the entire transcript of a presidents speech, they should be dismissed. All not providing a full source means is they care more for their narrative instead of reporting.

      1. Jeff being a liar also fails to mention that the Times claims to be better than the evil Fox News. They claim to be a news organization not a partisan one. Yet, when their partisanship is pointed out, here comes Jeff to tell about Fox News being conservative and how that makes it okay for the Times to degenerate into a leftist partisan rag.

        But that won’t stop him from claiming the Times as an unbiased source of information the next time doing so is convenient. Worse still, he has lied for so long he won’t even understand and see his own mendacity

        1. They claim to be a news organization not a partisan one.

          That’s funny, I recall a conversation not long ago when you were insistent that referencing the NYT as a credible and reliable news source was justifiable.

          Yet, when their partisanship is pointed out, here comes Jeff to tell about Fox News being conservative and how that makes it okay for the Times to degenerate into a leftist partisan rag.

          Literally not what I said. But far be it for me to stop you in your own mendacity.

          1. That’s funny, I recall a conversation not long ago when you were insistent that referencing the NYT as a credible and reliable news source was justifiable.

            No you dont. You’re fucking lying here too. The discussion was the fact that the NYT can post truth in their articles, such as when they post quotes or links to direct primary sources. You and sarcasmic were the ones claiming that if you thought the NYT was liberal you shouldnt use them in an argument. It was a stupid assertion by the new buddies.

            Saying the NYT is left wing doesnt mean they never post truthful snippets which was your argument. John and I mwrely stated that they can have things that are factual so one can use them in those instances despite views on their bias.

            Once again you’re fucking lying.

            1. Why don’t you let John speak for himself, Mr. Right-Wing White Knight

              1. You should probably spit out sarcasmic’s jizz before you travel down this road you fucking moron.

                1. Jeff’s hypocrisy is as monumental as his dishonesty.

              2. Pedo Jeffy, just kill yourself.

                That is all.

        2. Hey now… the NYT has won Pulitzer prizes for their false stories like Trump/Russia or the error riddles 1619 project.

          We should all strive to win prestigious awards for error riddled bullshit.

      2. Yes, Fox News has token liberals on to serve as foils for the right wing hosts and guests to yell at and make wild accusations about. MSNBC pulls the same type of schtick. None of this should be confused with a legitimate and honest attempt to provide viewers with a fair minded account of a story from multiple perspectives.

        Oddly missing from your diatribe is a news outlet that produces full unedited primary sources.

        It is literally not the job of the media to be just stenographers for the ruling class. No media outlet publishes the full Congressional Record either, as far as I am aware. Should they all be dismissed?

        1. They have liberals that appear on MSNBC, CNN, democrats, and campaign managers.

          Why is everything you say so dishonest?

    2. chem, you’re a little late to the party = If we continue down this same path, then the real casualty here will be the truth. Instead we will only have narratives that are constructed to feed individuals’ pre-existing biases. It will only reinforce those biases instead of serve to free individuals from the imprisonment of bias. Where does that lead us? Not to a happy place.

      1. I honestly think that NPR does a better job than most. They are still tilted to the left but at least, most of the time anyway, they have a fair minded discussion with both sides of an issue. They have a financial incentive to be fair minded to both sides because both sides pay their salaries via Congressional appropriations. On the other hand, partisan media have a financial incentive NOT to be fair minded. The moment that Breitbart ever ran an article that actually presented the liberal point of view on some issue fairly, accurately, and in good faith, their readers would accuse them of being “communist” and stampede away to the next most extreme right-wing outlet. Same mechanism on the left wing, I presume.

        1. NPR is garbage and needs 100% of its funding cut.

          Its a propaganda outlet for the Lefties under the guise of being neutral. A total lie.

          1. Then show me a news outlet that provides a fair and good faith discussion of the multiple sides of the issues associated with a story. I don’t think NPR is excellent in that regards, but they sure are better than anything in the partisan media landscape.

            1. Why do you need views? Why not just look at the primary sources yourself? Oh yeah. Lazy as fuck.

              1. First, no one realistically has the time to read every primary source on every issue, not even retired 70-year-olds in Arizona who have nothing else to do.

                Second, reading primary sources does not tell you about the connections between issues. How do you know which primary sources to read? If you just read a transcript of some politician’s speech on some issue, how do you know what other sources to read to understand the context behind the claims made in the speech? Where do you go to look up reliable statistics on various issues? Is every citizen supposed to be a master of statistics and data analysis as well as having infinite time to read every primary source?

                We have specialization of labor for a reason, because the amount of information that is present is too vast, there is no such thing as a ‘Renaissance man’ anymore.

                Furthermore, it is often interesting to see different perspectives on issues on ones that you may not have considered before and would likely not have discovered on your own had you been left up to your own devices.

                Here is an example. Listen to this podcast on ‘cancel culture’. It does a pretty good job I think of discussing the issue from different perspectives. It may not change your mind on the subject but at least you understand where others are coming from on the issue.

                https://www.npr.org/2020/07/20/893034155/what-we-talk-about-when-we-talk-about-cancel-culture

                1. Do news aggregation yourself, you lazy fuck.

                  Lefties hate news aggregation because it eliminates the gatekeepers.

                  NPR is a Lefty mouthpiece.

                  1. All you have to do is look at numbers of who those NPR give their political money to. DEMOCRATS.

                    1. If NPR employees hardly gave any political donations or it was some Democrat and some Republican and some Libertarian and some ____. Then I might be less skeptical.

                      Furthermore, anything you say is suspect so if you say NPR “does a pretty good job”, then NPR does not.

                      I love how easy Lefties have made it that whatever they say is 9/10 the exact opposite.

                      If Lefties hate Trump, then Trump is good.

        2. Yamiche Alcindor is a fucking disgrace to journalism. No wonder you like NPR.

          1. What does Ms. Alcindor have to do with NPR?

        3. I honestly think that NPR does a better job than most.

          LMFAO. Of course you do.

        4. I honestly think that NPR does a better job than most.

          A bit like saying members of the politburo do a better job than your average communist.

        5. I used to think that about NPR. Lately I’ve found it unbearable. Though lately I’ve found all news unbearable.

          1. I agree. They used to be about the only radio station that reliably employed correspondents that practically guaranteed to get a veiwpoint outside any given beltway and, AFAIK, they’re still pretty good about that. When the echo chamber portions were still relatively professional journalists, it was passably non-partisan (it wasn’t but you could pretend they were people doing their jobs).

            Then the echo chamber went so off the deep end that four hours of Rush Limbaugh couldn’t bring them back into balance.

    3. And that is the problem with the incessant bitching about “media bias” particularly from the right.

      LMFAO. “See, he wasn’t talking about me, he’s talking about YOU!” Holy fuck my guy. The best sort of own goals are when the poor fucking retard actually thinks he scored.

    4. [Frankly, many people’s definition of fair reporting amounts to “stories that agree with my views.”]

      And that is the problem with the incessant bitching about “media bias” particularly from the right. If there are no media outlets that even attempt to discover the real truth behind a story, where does that leave us?

      Since we need media to get to the real story the people complaining when they don’t are the problem. This may be the stupidest thing ever written on this site.

  8. If there were a market for unbiased reporting, that market would be served.

    1. In the long run sure. But not necessarily in the short run. Market inefficiency happens and can last for a very long time though not forever.

    2. There is a market for unbiased reporting. Its called the facts of a story without the reported commentary or skewing of facts.

      Most of it is local news. The local news anchor covers wrecks, fires, crime, and deaths. Mostly just facts.

    3. I think Justthenews.com does a solid bit of reporting focused simply on the evidence. John Solomon had a pretty good outfit running there.

      1. Why am I not surprised that you are touting a “news” source that is run by a right-wing opinion writer.

        1. Damn you are dumb. Did you even read what types if media I like? They have a Dig In tab that lists and links all the primary sources used in their news. They actually have very little opinion in their articles (ie quoted from people about the sources) and instead clip said sources.

          You really are pathetic.

        2. This from the stupid fucking cunt who thinks government-sponsored media is the most unbiased source of news and information.

          1. Find me one that does a better job.

            1. All of them?
              NPR likes to affect an academic tone, but it’s serving the exact same horseshit as the NYT, the Daily Mail and USA Today.
              Only naive fools think tone means smart.

      2. Here are six of the headlines right now from justthenews.com:


        LOCAL
        Portland high school football coach says fired because of job as a police officer
        ECONOMY
        Condi Rice: Socialism has ‘only worked at gunpoint’
        COURTS & LAW
        Trump orders hundreds of federal agents to Chicago to fight violent crime wave
        CONGRESS
        House Dems announce vote to remove Confederate statues, fail to mention 9 of 11 honor Democrats
        CONGRESS
        Rep. Gaetz accuses GOP conference chair Liz Cheney of working against Trump, calls for her removal
        POLITICAL ETHICS
        Fauci Files: Celebrated doc’s career dotted with ethics, safety controversies inside NIH

        Do you not see how these are serving a right-wing, pro-Trump narrative? Do you think this type of reporting ought to earn the label of “just the news”?

        1. Here are six of the headlines right now from npr.org

          ELECTIONS
          Susan Rice, Perhaps An Unlikely Contender, Lands On Biden’s VP Shortlist
          SHOTS – HEALTH NEWS
          Without A Vaccine, Researchers Say, Herd Immunity May Never Be Achieved
          THE CORONAVIRUS CRISIS
          Trump’s Favorite Coronavirus Metric, The Case Fatality, Is Unreliable
          POLITICS
          ‘I Could Not Allow That To Stand’: Ocasio-Cortez Rebukes Republican For Vulgar Insult
          LIVE UPDATES: PROTESTS FOR RACIAL JUSTICE
          Despite Trump’s Veto Threat, Senate Approves Provision To Rename Military Bases

          A true beacon of neutrality and impartial, fact-based, hard-hitting journalism.

          1. What do you perceive is the problem from those headlines?

            1. They are biased and narrative-forming in the exact same way as the headlines you cited from justthenews, only they are hard-left, so of course you are blind to it, because you’re not only a partisan shill but also have no objectivity or sense of irony.

          2. Furthermore you’re deflecting from what I posted above.
            All of those headlines from justthenews.com are pro-Trump, pro-right-wing, with not even a semblance of balance. Do you not see that?

            1. “Furthermore you’re deflecting from what I posted above.”

              It’s not deflecting for him to post the results of the source you were championing, “NPR”, in response to the source you were criticizing. In point of fact it’s a classic logical comparison of the two sources.

            2. And all of those headlines from NPR are anti-Trump, pro-left-wing, with not even a semblance of balance. Do you not see that? Why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s eye, but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?

    4. The fact is, unbiased reporting has never been a thing and it’s unlikely to ever be a thing. Only journalists are of the opinion yellow journalism died, as opposed to just relabeling it as a ‘click bait’ and hope no one notices.

      Look at the bottom of this very page and ask yourself what publications really are. Even here, they call them ‘promoted stories’ and pretend that those are ‘news’ which is…hilarious from my point of view.

      Do some publications take the whole ‘honesty’ thing more serious than others? Probably, but the entire model demands some level of dishonesty to attract viewers/readers. Centrism doesn’t sell, and newspapermen have always known this.

      Journalism is sort of proof that those that write the history books can make their own truth.

    5. If there were a market for unbiased reporting, that market would be served.

      And if there were a market for free healthcare, it would be mandatory to participate.

    6. Part of the issue with “journalism” is that there are several markets overlapping there. The product advertising ecosystem overlaps with the political advertising ecosystem and both overlap with the ecosystem of people who will pay to read news analysis; and then there’s the book reviews and tech reviews and movie reviews and lifestyle sections.

      The news market is at odds with the advertising market. I would love to see the lists of correlations that the data companies keep: I read news in the afternoon, Google overheard us discussing rodents as pets, so I get ads for exterminators all night. I am sure somewhere there’s “if x=reads NYT opinion then show chemo drug ads= yes” and “if x= browser on Reason too long then show pro-Trump graphics= yes”. So the product preference surveys link to the political preference surveys and the demographics and they present ideas that are likely to draw the market for those products. Leave a browser window on, oh Jacobin for a day and then see how your ads change.

      But all the ostensibly no-cost independent blogs are trying to serve that market you mention.

  9. “If conservatives don’t like The New York Times, they don’t have to read it.”

    If you’re a libertarian, however, that will be more difficult. Because even if you don’t try to, Reason will cover what’s in the NYT daily.

    1. I was thinking the same

    2. Despite the diminished influence of newspapers, the NYT still sets the tone of what stories are important to cover for the rest of the media in national news. Not to mention their ideological series like the 1619 Project getting incorporated into public school curriculums.

    3. Well, if you put the mouse on a link, you can see where it is going. No need to click on an NYT article. I always check a link to see if it is a news citation, or a continuation of the reason propaganda.

    4. Look the NYT, WaPo and Vox are totally legit non-partisan sources according to the leftists writing for Reason and their white knights.

  10. Biased reporting is not the problem. Labeling biased reporting as unbiased is the issue. Particularly, for outlets like NBC, CBS, and ABC who the unwashed implicitly trust. They are all most certainly biased but the guzzlers of the nightly news believe what they are getting is the unvarnished truth.

    1. They left bias behind a long while back. Everyone has bias.

      Reason labeling itself as a libertarian magazine is an excellent way to handle that.

      But the big networks plus CNN/MSNBC go way past bias. They are in full propaganda mode. They coordinate strategy for partisan gain… and have done so since at least the late 90’s. (Drudge had a tip on the 2000 election – all 5 of the big news networks were colluding with the Kerry campaign to run a week of stories coordinated with his ad spend focusing on Vietnam. The Dan Rather fake story blew that up, or you would have heard more about it.)

      The difference is more than one of degree. The press can be the light that protects freedom from tyranny, or they can be the Orwellian ministry of Truth, designed to obfuscate. We currently are experiencing an unhealthy dose of the latter.

      1. Reason labeling itself as a libertarian magazine but serving bog-standard leftist tripe, is the exact same problem as the mainstream media pretending that they’re unbiased.

        1. I don’t think that is a fair characterization. They certainly aren’t hard-core libertarian anymore. But they are hardly standard leftist tripe. They may narrowly agree on a few issues with the left, but are hardly towing the lion.
          I’d say that the “cocktail parties” thing is a more accurate one. They like their journalist buddies and want to be part of the crowd.

    2. Remember when NBC got caught doctoring the Zimmerman 911 call?

      Remember when NBC, huh, got caught forcing an SUV to flip over due to a ‘tire explosion’?

      And those two things happened more than a decade apart. There’s plenty of other examples, these two are just off the top of my head.

  11. The problem is not a conservative purge at the NYT. The problem is a purge of any thought that isnt 100% Crazy Marxist. That’s a sign that they want a literal revolution. Thankfully the only positive is that none of them are capable of fighting for their cause

    1. “Crazy Marxist”

      Sure, I read just the other day in the New York Times about how the proletariat should rise up in revolution against the bourgeoisie…

      You know, criticism of the media would be more effective if it wasn’t grounded in baseless hyperbole.

      1. You mean the 1619 project? They dove head first into Critical Theory. Sorry you’re so blinded.

      2. lol, this was the top result after a two second search
        “Happy Birthday Marx, you were right!”
        https://www.nytimes.com/2018/04/30/opinion/karl-marx-at-200-influence.html

        1. Did you read the article? It is not advocating for Marxist revolution.

          Instead it is making the argument that much of what Marx believed in his day has come to be adopted by common middle-class folks of all types. That basically “we’re all Marxists now”.

          1. They are delusional out of touch Marxists. And you are too if you think that “we’re all Marxists now”

            1. That is their argument that they are making. It is not an argument in favor of Marxism. Take issue with their argument all you want. I don’t agree with it myself. But I also don’t confuse it with advocacy FOR Marxism.

              1. I bet the balloon hammer and sickle and balloon red star are the most popular with the kids but, secretly, I bet the balloon clenched fist is the one you’re the best at making. You can probably make an inflatable clenched fist out of a garden hose can’t you?

          2. I can only assume a Karl Marx Birthday Party Clown Suit is owned by no one and smells like ass.

      3. You know, criticism of the media would be more effective if it wasn’t grounded in baseless hyperbole.

        It’s not like the NYT ever employed a literal communist who lied about the Soviet starvation of millions of people as a bureau chief or anything like that. Jeez guys.

        1. Walter Duranty doesn’t exist in Jeff’s Year Zero worldview.

  12. Unlike in the not-so-distant past, you now have endless media options.

    Country AND Western.

    1. “Rock and roll’s been going down hill ever since Buddy Holly died.”

      -John Milner

  13. The family that owns the NYT were slave owners.

    http://nypost.com/2020/07/18/the-family-that-owns-the-new-york-times-were-slaveholders-goodwin/

    Shove that up your cancel culture asses.

    1. And not the good kind of slave owner either, they were white.

    2. Getting stomped into political and cultural irrelevance in the American culture war (settled but not over) has made you quite cranky, Rob Misek.

      I hope you find some peace during the time you have left before you are replaced.

      1. “ Getting stomped into political and cultural irrelevance”

        And I thought it was about tolerance.

  14. How about just, you know, reporting the facts?

    Just the facts ma’am.

    I don’t need to know you thought it was a beautiful day.

    Just give it straight.

    1. You cannot say you are changing the world and imposing justice and good morals upon it just stating facts

      1. Well, then don’t. Those are moral judgments. Just report.

        1. But that is not what they got in the journalism business to do. They think journalism is good way to go about ideological activism. Dispassionate reportage just does not cut it.

          1. And this is an actual fact, in that most people go into journalism to ‘change the world’ when you ask journalism students.

            Only after the journalism classes do they learn to hide this about themselves, even though they are incredibly terrible at hiding it.

            In a way, we’re all lucky that journalism departments at just about every college are run by people that just view it as a sinecure.

    2. Which facts? There are an awful lot of facts.

  15. At least Reason’s purge of libertarians didn’t hurt Reason at all!

    Oh wait, it did: they permanently lost something like half to two-thirds of their old readers. Not that they care; they don’t at all.

    1. Daddy KochBucks has deep pockets.

  16. ASIA FOR THE ASIANS, AFRICA FOR THE AFRICANS, WHITE COUNTRIES FOR EVERYBODY!
    The words “immigration”, “tolerance” and “assimilation” are being used to PROMOTE a program of genocide against White children.
    According to International Law, open borders, FORCED integration, and assimilation is GENOCIDE.
    Except they don’t call it GENOCIDE when it’s done to White children.
    Then they call it “multiculturalism”
    STOP WHITE GENOCIDE!
    Anti-racist is a codeword for anti-White.

  17. Conservatives may complain about left-wing bias among journalists, as they have for a half-century. They aren’t wrong, but most of them would love it if mainstream journos were replaced by Fox News reporters and talk radio personalities.

    My problems are (1) that so many outlets that once concealed their bias, or at least restricted it to opinion articles and story selections or omissions, thus earning a reputation as generally reliable news sources, now amount to little more than progressive editorial mills, (2) that despite the ever-growing number of news sources catering to every political preference and niche demographic, the number of outlets credibly committed to presenting important news in a neutral and balanced fashion to a general audience has dwindled, and (3) the most prestigious journalism schools, such as Columbia, have come to regard traditional journalistic ethics and objectivity as dangerously naive and insensitive, lacking in moral clarity, too tolerant of all the Literal Hitlers who maintain an oppressive status quo.

    Sad to see journalists of all people, those supposed champions of free speech and hard facts, ditch the last vestiges of liberalism in favor of an emasculated, subjectivistic, pomo-scented, soft cultural Maoism.

  18. I think it is important to mention that Weiss was not merely a columnist, she also was an editor. So she had some input on the overall tone of the NYT reporting.

    If you are not going to lament major media outlets becoming ideological stalwarts, then I hope there will not be hand wringing over the subsequent loss of trust and respect for outlets like the NYT in the future.

  19. Unlike in the not-so-distant past, you now have endless media options.

    More access to a completely uncredentialled, socially-connected network of yammering morons than ever before!

  20. It’s cute that Reasons writers think that the NYT has journalists, editors, and news. In reality, the NYT hasn’t been a newspaper for years; it’s direct marketing for Democrats and progressives, and you better believe that the people financing it want an ROI.

  21. Bari Weiss is not center-right. She’s center-left. But at the NYT, they are so far to the left now, that she probably looks radical far-right to them.

  22. “If conservatives don’t like The New York Times, they don’t have to read it.”

    We don’t, and we haven’t. with an exception of 2011 – 2013, their circulation has been declining since 2001.
    As in damn near two decades.

    (https://www.statista.com/statistics/273503/average-paid-weekday-circulation-of-the-new-york-times/)

  23. It is easy to tell a news story from a plain old story.
    If there are multiple, reliable, named, verifiable, agreeing sources of actual people instead of other legacy media outlets cited, it is a new story. Otherwise it is an opinion piece.
    Sadly, the obvious must be stated, no social media platforms count as a source.

    1. Sadly, the obvious must be stated, no social media platforms count as a source.

      I blame Karens in the workplace for the fact that Twitter became regarded as anything beyond an over-the-fence news source.

      1. Less than ‘over the fence’. Over the fence is face to face and not anonymous.

  24. conservative is a dead word.

  25. Bari Weiss was a ‘take my ball and go home’ misfit in high school, in college, at the Wall Street Journal, and at the New York Times.

    The clingers see this as an indictment of The New York Times.

    I see this — Weiss’ tantrum, and the general conservative whining in response — as additional evidence that conservatives have become cranky and desperate consequent to losing the culture war.

    1. Yeah… you clearly do not have the requisite knowledge to comment on this issue. This has been brewing for quite some time, and many of her peers have been commenting on her predicament at the Times on blogs, podcasts etc. for weeks before she quit. These are people of the non-woke left – the sort who signed the letter in defense of free speech that should have been dismissed for its bizarre off-topic asides about how much they all hate Trump instead of being controversial for advocating for free speech.

      You need to find a better source for your talking points.

      1. “Yeah… you clearly do not have the requisite knowledge to comment on this issue….”

        And many, many others.

      2. “This has been brewing for quite some time, ”

        . . . . since she was a disaffected misfit in high school, at least (I am not familiar with whether she was a stale-thinking malcontent in junior high school).

  26. “If conservatives don’t like The New York Times, they don’t have to read it.” Fascinating. I see a Pulitzer in your future, Steven.

  27. 21)I don’t know what to say really what you share is so good and helpful to the community, I feel that it makes our community much more developed, thanks. Heres what I do…Heres what I do …. Heres what I do۔۔۔۔۔Read More.

  28. Fox news only has commentary from Trump supporters? Really?

    I mean, sure, conservative populist types are their core. Hannity being the poster child, and their talking head opinion shows have always skewed way right. One thing that differentiates them is that even the talking head opinion shows have always had voices of the left.

    It is an old formula that everyone used to know. McLaughlin group, Point/CounterPoint, Firing Line, This Week with David Brinkley, etc. You have to have two sides to have an argument. Otherwise, there are no fireworks.

    CNN, MSNBC and the rest on the left abandoned this notion a couple of decades ago. They have their fireworks with straw men, and they do the Stewart Smirk in lieu of actual argument.

    Fox still has disparate voices on, despite an organized boycott by democrats designed entirely to counter that argument. I don’t catch them all that often any more – talking head shows were always terrible, but in the era of long-format podcast interviews, they really hold no attraction. But I have seen enough clips shared around to know that they have Trump detractors from the left and right on, and despite having a distinctly pro-republican overall bent, they are certainly not the one-note propaganda machine that the left pretends they are. Well, unless you only watch the prime time opinion shows. They are pretty solidly right-republican, if not entirely pro-Trump. But even those shows have representatives of the far left on to provide the alternative argument. And they don’t get someone who aligns with the Bush camp to represent “the left” the way CNN does with their “conservative voices” that are actually center-left Bidenesque voices – RINO types who split with the party because Bush’s “compassionate conservatism” was too right wing extremist for them.

    There really are not many conservative voices left in the press, even at Fox. Hannity might call himself a conservative, but he’s often less than consistent on that notion. Tucker Carleson might be more ideological. But there are no George Will and William F. Buckley conservative intellectual types to espouse an ideological viewpoint. They have almost entirely been relegated to the corners of the internet, writing for blogs and think tank type places, doing podcasts and generally existing on the edges of public discourse.

    And libertarians? It seems we are not even well represented at the flagship libertarian publication with any great consistency. Being a libertarian writer is really easy. The rules of libertarianism are really simple. Taking a hard libertarian line is trivial – do you guys even NAP?

    You have to go to blogs and old-school libertarian think tanks to get anything resembling consistent libertarian voices. For the last several years, the comments section here (and the diaspora at Glib) are home to more libertarian thought than the actual pages of Reason. That really shouldn’t be the case, since one of the great criticisms of libertarianism is that it is too simplistic and rigid, therefore not a serious ideology. That makes sorting out the libertarian position really easy in all but the contentious edge cases.

    The denizens of HnR have been warning of this dearth of ideological diversity in the media for a very long time. Now that the woke left is starting to eat all those voices of the left that were happy to tell us that we were crazy for thinking that there were threats to the marketplace of ideas, it might be too late to do anything about it. With woke pressures working to convert the mainstream media into nothing more than a propaganda machine, you’d think we could turn to alternative media…. but they also have their hands around the throats of the banking industry, alternative payment processors, large internet platforms, telecommunications companies and computer hosting companies.

    Reason should be immune – with independent funding coming entirely from libertarians. Yet somehow the “declaration of Independents” crowd soft melted the libertarian voice into a mushy voice during Obama, and TDS finished them off. For a while the equivocal voice of Soave was the lone voice crying out about any threats to free speech. The last few months have finally awakened some libertarian voices – but it might just be too late. And they certainly lack the clarity and sharpened arguments that would be available had the last 4 years been spent in defense of open discourse and honest government instead of handwringing over impolitic tweets by the Troll in Chief.

    1. A nice history of the problem, Cyto.

      Again, it’s too damned bad this magazine’s editorial staff hasn’t asked you for an article. Then again, it’s not like I read the articles anyway.

  29. “If conservatives don’t like The New York Times, they don’t have to read it. Unlike in the not-so-distant past, you now have endless media options.”
    Pegged it in the sub-title. What the old media doesn’t seem to get even now is that there’s a whole lot of new media out there and it offers far greater opportunity to get information in depth.

  30. Every month start earning more cash from $20,000 to $24,000 by working very simple j0b 0nline from home. I have earned last month $23159 from this by just doing this 0nline w0rk for maximum 3 to 4 hrs a day using my laptop. This home j0b is just awesome and regular earning from this are much times better than other regular 9 to 5 desk j0b. Now every person on this earth can get this j0b and start making dollars 0nline just by follow instructions on the given web pageClick Here For Full Detail.

  31. a center-right columnist at the left-leaning New York Times

    What “right” ideas does she have?

    1. Opposes anti-semitism, and
    2. Supports free speech.

    This is enough to be labelled on the “right” these days?

    1. Yeah, everyone has been calling her right wing since she left. That’s just nuts. She’s left. Really left. There’s some overlap with libertarians and some overlap with conservatives on issues related to Israel, but I really don’t see how anyone could label her “right wing” unless they were from the CWP BLM Antifa crowd.

  32. Fox News—an outlet that runs opinions ranging from those who adore President Trump to those who merely like him

    Fox has always had many liberals including Juan Williams, Mara Liasson, and Chris Wallace. Further they – especially Wallace – are treated as normal contributors rather than tokens, the result being a workforce more mixed than the NYT or other major outlets.
    Remember, this nonsense is from someone presenting himself as more reliable than the norm so as to correct a general mis-analysis by the public. The result is revealing that Greenhut’s anti-conservatism has left him unable to understand where the lines are which negates his assertion the NYT actions are nothing to worry about.

    Further the NYT is not purging conservatives, they’re intimidating to silence or purging liberals.

    1. Exactly. The purge turning to liberals is why this is getting attention now, so casting it as a purge of conservatives is just silly.

  33. If you don’t like The New York Times, don’t read it. Unlike in the not-so-distant past, you now have endless options.

    It’s revealing Greenhut thinks it is out of bounds to read it and point out its flaws so it becomes less influential. Why is he so concerned about protecting the NYT?

  34. I don’t read the NYT anymore and I never heard of Bari Weiss either but cancel culture is real and reason writers — whether they care about fact-based journalism or Reading divergent opinions—should at least care if free speech is endangered by so called journalists or others.

  35. “Conservatives” to the NYT and Wapo seem to be Jewish Neocons…never see a “conservative or libertarian” with say a last name like Rizzo or Murphy at those places…then again I agree with the author of this..who cares..haven’t read the NYT in years..can’t after I read how the owners supported the largest lynching in American history or defended Stalin in the Ukraine. F the Times…who cares

  36. In the glory days of the New York Times, the Editor responded to threats against it by setting up one Gatling gun in the newsroom window and another in the front entrance:

    https://vvattsupwiththat.blogspot.com/2017/10/climate-of-fear-at-new-york-times.html

    1. The NY Times and its ilk call black looting and rioting “peaceful protest”, but calls “white silence is violence”. How 1984 can you get? Worst, if you read their reader commentaries it is nothing but an echo chamber. Liberals trying to out liberal each other with virtue signaling. Even National Review’s on line commentaries are more diverse. And with all the cancel culture, why doesnt’t the NYT own up to its racist past during and post Civil War?

  37. I Make Money At H0me.Let’s start work offered by Google!!Yes,this is definitely the most financially rewarding Job I’ve had . YEr Last Monday I bought a great Lotus Elan after I been earning $9534 this-last/5 weeks and-a little over, $10k last month . . I started this four months/ago and immediately started to bring home minimum $97 per/hr

    Heres what I do…… SeeMore here

  38. Yes. You’re the bitch. You were the 2nd post in a thread and you cried about future imagined comments.

    Then you cry when people call your bitch post out for what it was.

    It is actually very amusing.

    Half the time you cry about posters, you were the first one to have actually insulted someone. That is the hilarious thing about it.
    Website

  39. Remember when Nick G was one of the few liberals that was publishing articles at Reason, seems like this outlet has been flooded since all the lay offs happened. Nick’s great in doses.
    The NYT has ALWAYS been propaganda and anyone who doesn’t ‘remember the Maine’, Walter Duranty, or the recent behavior since 2016’s election (Should my child be friends with white kids)….
    Nice to see Reason keeps hiring leftist Journo’s that keep getting laid off from crappy, openly left wing media outlets.

  40. My last month paycheck was for 11000 … 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 HERE? Read More

  41. The NY Times and its ilk call black looting and rioting “peaceful protest”, but calls “white silence is violence”. How 1984 can you get? Worst, if you read their reader commentaries it is nothing but an echo chamber. Liberals trying to out liberal each other with virtue signaling. Even National Review’s on line commentaries are more diverse. And with all the cancel culture, why doesnt’t the NYT own up to its racist past during and post Civil War?

  42. This is disingenuous. One reads the NY Times or the Washington Post to get news. Reading the editorials is optional. The problem arises when “news” articles use and abuse words to push a point of view. Everyone who has ever studied history should be aware of this. When the NYT refers to terrorists as “militants” it is propagandizing. Of course they are going to hire a few conservatives to write opinion pieces, but it is unlikely that they will hire any “reporters” who don’t follow the “line.”

  43. I have been working from home for 4 years now and I love it. I don’t have a boss standing over my shoulder and I make my own hours. The tips below are very informative and anyone currently working from home or planning to in the future could use these.Make 5000 bucks every month… Start doing online computer-based work through our website……………………<Click For Full Details.

Please to post comments