New York Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger has issued a lengthy warning in the Washington Post (9/5/24) on the dangers another Donald Trump presidency would pose to a “free and independent press.”
You might expect this to be a prelude to an announcement that the New York Times would work tirelessly to defend democracy. Instead, Sulzberger heartily defends his own miserably inadequate strategy of “neutrality”—which, in practice, is both-sidesing—making plain his greater concern for the survival of his own newspaper than the survival of US democracy.
ACTION ALERT: You can send a message to the New York Times at letters@nytimes.com. Please remember that respectful communication is the most effective. Feel free to leave a copy of your communication in the comments thread.
Yeah, but if the media accurately depicted Trump as a deeply unserious candidate with absolutely no idea how to run anything, you might stop watching the news to see who is ahead, and don’t their ability to sell ads via a horse race narrative matter more than your silly country and life?
Outrage drives engagement. Been a tactic since the printed word but goddamn if it didn’t explode after CNN and Reagan in the 80’s
Today it reminds me of pro wrestling when half of the stories are what this political celebrity said about that political celebrity, and I’ll wonder how similar or different it was long ago.
I’m not sure that proto-Elamite and Sumerian civilizations using cylinder seals to certify documents written in clay tablets was that outrageous…
And the Greatest Pedant award goes to @Viking_Hippie!!!
I don’t think seals and signet rings count as printed communication in the context of my original comment reply.
It wasn’t pedantry, it was a (poor) attempt at humor lol
When I get pedantic for real, it’s MUCH more annoying and I usually stop myself before hitting send 😁
Oh! We both might’ve missed the mark then, I was trying to yes and the joke you made.
Also I didn’t know about Proto-Elamite tech at all. Thanks for the links!