Bloggers are quick to report on Trump’s latest mistakes, lies, gaffes, outrages, and mental confusion, but a large swathe of the media reports on his speeches without pointing out his lies, threats, and incoherence. A group called the Media and Democracy Project decided to bring their complaints directly to the nation’s most influential newspaper, The New York Times.
THE GOOD NEWS

Peaceful Protest Outside The Times
The New York Times is the most powerful news organization in the United States. The narratives created by its editors and journalists have a cascading effect; the rest of the political press internalizes the Times’ agenda and then spits out its priorities and frames to the wider masses. The editorial decisions made on 8th Avenue in New York have a real impact on Americans’ understanding of the stakes of the upcoming elections and the future of our democracy.
An increasing number of regular people are joining media critics in pointing out that the Times is failing catastrophically with its election coverage, in what feels like their leadership willfully ceding to abnormalcy. This month, Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger wrote an exhaustive chronicle of worldwide threats to press freedoms, yet still drew the conclusion that he mustn’t direct his staff to accurately contextualize, or warn of, the threat to democracy here at home.

By failing to join the fight and act as partisans for democracy, Sulzberger and the Times are failing in their critical role to accurately inform American citizens. Drew Magary recently commented in SFGATE that the “Times cares more about its place in the power structure than in actually affecting that power structure.” Magary’s piece goes further to say no one should care what the Times says anymore and we should all ignore its political coverage. His righteous dismissal is a response to the Times’ efforts to reject criticism, both internal and external.

When A.G. Sulzberger’s father eliminated the Public Editor position in 2017, he assured his readership that they were now the most important critics. Dan Froomkin chronicled this for his Press Watch website:
At the time, Sulzberger wrote in a memo to the newsroom that “our followers on social media and our readers across the internet have come together to collectively serve as a modern watchdog, more vigilant and forceful than one person could ever be. Our responsibility is to empower all of those watchdogs, and to listen to them, rather than to channel their voice through a single office.”
The charade of newsroom responsiveness to outside criticism did not last long. Only a few years later, Times chief Dean Baquet was completely dismissive of “followers on social media,” saying “I could care less about the unnuanced voices on Twitter. That doesn’t mean I don’t care about what our readers think, but I don’t pay as much attention to Twitter as Twitter might want me to.”

We’ve explored all manner of tactics to get the Times to improve its coverage and regain its credibility, including calling on them in January to reinstate the position of Public Editor. We have not heard back as of the writing of this piece.
While some, like Magary, believe it’s no longer worth anyone’s energy trying to effect change at the Times, we disagree. A workplace is not a monolith and there are many employees there who disagree with the Times’ normalizing coverage of the Trump/MAGA threat to democracy. We want to aid those workers by facilitating a culture of dissent.

On September 18th, we joined a peaceful protest outside the Times building organized by Rise and Resist, a New York City-based direct action group. Flyers with criticisms of A.G. Sulzberger and senior editors were handed to employees entering the building with the goal of inspiring the humans who power the New York Times to activate their moral core and advocate for a change in political coverage.

No more excuses can be made for the upper management’s normalizing and sanewashing of the most manifestly unfit person ever to run for president. It is unlikely that the Times’ HR department would approve a person like Trump for any position in their building. So why are the powerful people who run the Times deceiving America about his fitness to take a job leading us all?

Did you all see this? 9/21/24 https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/09/21/us/politics/trump-harris-2024-election-speech.html?searchResultPosition=2 David Greene 914.523.6835 http://dcgphotos.smugmug.com
LikeLike
23 false statements for Trump versus 1 for Harris.
I presume you think it’s terrible that the Times fact-checked both candidates?
LikeLike
Zzzzzzz
LikeLike
the interesting thing about this protest is that it is evidence that the NYT is a sort of government. That probably sounds crazy, but I believe that when a private entity reaches a certain pervasive size or influence, it actually becomes a layer of government. When a person assembled a huge amount of money, when a news organization reaches out to a large geographic area, these entities function as government parallel to our own. Their influence on the government we elect is comparable to a foreign power having that effect.
Protest is the thing you do to a government, as is evidenced by the First Amendment guarantee of the right of peaceful assemblage. When that protest is directed at an entity from private enterprise, we have a competing government.
LikeLike
I think you are correct. I also believe it is bigger than NYT. Eastern media is as isolated as D.C. The networks bring in Times reports and reporters as commentary with only a smattering of perspective beyond the chattering class. I am often flummoxed by reporting outside of the NYT sphere that seems wholly ignored. The Times has, as of late made explicit warnings about Trump, but their efforts tend to stop once they make the proclamation whereas their reporters, and those in their media orbit constantly ask about Harris’ policy chops. There is a significant echo chamber that falls back on a binary political parsing of left and right with almost no nuance. Ezra Klein’s podcast attempted to address the conundrum this week with Emily Jashinsky, who described herself as the new right. The report began as a look at the perspectives of young conservatives vs. establishment conservatives, but they continuously fell back on the right vs. left duopoly rather than the real circumstances that develop political points of view. The writing in the Times is usually sharp, but the investigative journalism comes across as timid. We have a country where policy is dominated by one region of the country where the Times exists. A significant part of our current polarized political state is the result of media that reports on who we are as a country without experiencing the intellectual and cultural diversity that is trying to be heard.
LikeLike
Thanks, Paul. Hood observations
LikeLike
Roy: The protest should also extend to FOX “News,” big time. CBK
LikeLike
Agree wholeheartedly. To me, the best example of this is Elon Musk, a sole individual who literally can influence world events on a whim, with no limitations from any government or business entity.
LikeLike
From the pictures, many of them look like the “grey panthers.” Good for these activists. They would rather call out “The New York Times” for its bias than stay at home watching Fox News and believing the lies like so many other boomers.
LikeLike
cx: gray panthers
LikeLike
Heather Cox Richardson – September 25, 2024 – “Letter from An American” (Bold print mine; not the author’s)
“In 2004 a senior advisor to President George W. Bush famously told journalist Ron Suskind that people like Suskind lived in “the reality-based community.” They believed people could find solutions to problems through careful study of discernible reality. But, the aide continued, Suskind’s worldview was obsolete.
“That’s not the way the world really works anymore,” the aide said. “We are an empire now, and when we act, we create our own reality. And while you’re studying that reality— judiciously, as you will—we’ll act again, creating other new realities, which you can study too, and that’s how things will sort out. We’re history’s actors…and you, all of you, will be left to just study what we do.””
LikeLike
One person’s testimony in the January 6 hearings captures it. He drove across the country because Trump “asked me to go.” He was arrested. My take is went through a cult intervention upon return. He explained he only watched fox news, only followed trump and similar tweets, only saw trump social media and blogs. He went down the proverbial rabbit hole. When asked, “Why did you leave the riot” he responded “I got a tweet from Trump telling us to go home.” (hours after the deaths and damage). Speaks volumes!
The “Free” Press is all we’ve got! Generalizations below!
Until Walter Cronkite spoke, they “normalized” war with the daily Viet Nam updates like box scores in the sports section.
A kid born in 2000 voting perhaps in her/his first presidential election ONLY knows this hateful, blame, finger-pointing, lying, exaggerating rhetoric (birther…). This is beyond “Trump just being Trump” to people thinking this is normal.
Keep those protests in the forefront.
LikeLike
Traitor Trump, the convicted rapist, fraud and felon, has always been unfit to be a father, a husband, a business owner, a boss, so why would he be fit to return to the White House as president.
To a crime lord like Traitor Trump being convicted of rape, fraud and becoming a felon is like getting an Academy Award.
I wonder if the mafia hands out awards to the most violent and successful criminals that belong to their gangs.
LikeLike
The greatest irony is that despite the fact that T & his supporters call the NYT the “enemy of the people,” the NYT played a major role in getting him elected in 2016.
LikeLike
Roy as usual hit on the crux: “Their influence on the government we elect is comparable to a foreign power having that effect.”
Now imagine a major media influence with NO editorial board, ZERO regulation on what can be said and NO accountability to any governing authority whatsoever. That is where we are today with secret proprietary algorithms guiding what we are exposed to on YouTube, FaceBook, IG, and other apps.
Our entire society is changing fundamentally at the behest of tech wizards behind the curtain who, in their haste to emulate oleaginous edge-lord Musk, have monetized you and I hating one another.
LikeLike
I am just wondering what an objective media would sound like? Does anyone know?
LikeLike
No
LikeLike
Good answer!
LikeLike
It’s my answer to most questions.
LikeLike
Chuckjordan: Well, you’d think it would start by recognizing and exposing forces in the culture that, if they continue to gain power, will kill the freedom of the press and, with it, the public’s access to truth itself. And certainly NOT keep shooting its own ground out from under itself.
To the NYTimes: “It’s foundations, stupid.” CBK
LikeLike