Skip to comments.New York Times a sinking ship that can no longer aid Obama
Posted on 08/28/2012 3:48:49 AM PDT by workerbee
As they head to the convention, anxious Republicans wonder, do Americans get it? Do they understand what is at stake? Will the liberal media prevail?
To which I say: not to worry! Americans are on top of the issues, and ahead of the curve. How can I be so certain? There are several data points, but lets start with one that is especially gratifying one that shows that the country no longer believes in the New York Times.
In a recent Pew poll, the legendary paper of record was voted less believable than ABC News, the Wall Street Journal, CNN, NBC news, and CBS News. What a comedown for the Grey Lady.
Not only is the paper considered less trustworthy than most others news organizations, the decline has been sharp. The average believability of the 13 news organizations reviewed was 56%; the Times came in at 49%. (The Wall Street Journal comes in at 58%, by comparison.) Whereas trust in all those outfits has dropped in recent years, the Times has fared worse than most. Since 2010, their rating has sunk from 58 to 49.
For a paper that boasts a proud heritage and certainly a devoted following among liberals, this should be worrisome. Indeed, in his farewell column published this past weekend, Public Editor Arthur Brisbane, essentially the paper's ombudsman, took the Times to task, saying that its political and cultural progressivism
virtually bleeds through the fabric of The Times. He describes the paper as a hive on Eighth Avenue
shaped by a culture of like minds a uni-view that he suggests is more visible from the outside than the inside. That may or may not be correct, but for sure, Americans have taken note.
(Excerpt) Read more at foxnews.com ...
The election of 2008 will go down as a milestone in the death of the Old Media; never had it become so clear to so many that it had become the organ of the Democratic Party. None of them will recover - the alternative media sought out by the intended targets has only grown since then. They’ll be reduced to including political indoctrination in weather reports as the only way to reach most people.
When ‘all the news that’s fit to print’ is changed to ‘all the news that fits our agenda’, credibility goes out the window - as does relevance.
New York Times a sinking ship that can no longer aid Obama
Good. Die you gravy sucking pig!
I agree, personally I have Zero trust in the MSM and even less in the Gov. if possible. Fox is about the only thing with any sort of believability. If i want to find reasonably accurate news I get it from our British cousins
I used to like newspapers, and mourn the loss a major American institution, the urban newspaper. The New York Times was never perfect, but it was once a great institution itself. Now, it is rudderless and adrift, squandering a great legacy and what little integrity it has left. RIP.
Someone on FreeRepublic used to flag these types of articles as part of the “Dinosaur Media Death Watch.”
OK... so if Americans ARE on top of the issues (which, personally I highly doubt), they`re going into this election with eyes wide open. So, if that is indeed the case, and 0bama is reelected, we`ll then know what type of country the voters want.... and it isn`t the one I grew up in.
I am still waiting got that ship to sink..
Newspapers are good for only three things:
1. Crossword puzzle.
2. Food coupons.
3. Bird cage liner.
No. They get free sh!t - Obamaphones, Obamacars, EBT cards for their cigs and booze, and lots and lots of pie...
Do they understand what is at stake?
Do they even care? They have American Idol...
Will the liberal media prevail?
What little I heard of Limbaugh yesterday, he posited that the RNC leadership doesn't understand what is at stake with this election.
1. Remember that guy who used to post after the 2008 elections the network newscasts will go dark and the networks will be just a few of millions of URLs comepting ont the web...? Is he still around?
2. The dinosaur media is SO IMMENSELY POWERFUL they, ALMOST SINGLE HANDEDLY, put a foreigner into the White House. The kenyan was a virtual stranger to the American people. We knew NOTHING about the man, and the things that we COULD have known (reverend wright, anti-Americanism) were NEVER known by the American people because the allegedly weak, dying, pathetic MSM didnt want us to know.
The MSM has ruled us for 40 years at least, and they have killed the nation and the nation is NEVER coming back; there are now too many welfare begging maggots in this nation, and the MSM has convinced half the non-beggars that not supporting the beggars is mean and/or racist.
The Times is so broke it might consider going tabloid with old school cheesecake centerfolds. First pin up -Princess Obama. Turn ons - socialism, taxes, debt. Turn offs - individualism,religion,spending cuts.
The media has been on a death watch for a long time now, but yet they stay in business.
I would bet that baraq is keeping them in business to 1. Keep their loyalty and to 2. Threaten them with withdrawal of funds if they show any disloyalty.
baraq has used taxpayer money to keep unions and phony companies afloat, why not his media?
You are correct. It’s taken much, much longer than I thought it would, but the old media is going the way of the buggy whip.
I see basically four groupings of people as far as how they get their news:
1. The Fox News crowd and radio listeners - a growing demographic.
2. The ABCNBCCBSMSNBCCNNNYTIMESWASHINGTONPOSTPSNPR crowd - a shrinking demographic.
3. The Jon Stewart-Bill Maher-MTV crowd - which is very sporadic and transient.
4. The woefully uninformed - most of which are in the FSA (Free S*** Army) who won’t pay attention until the check gets drastically reduced or cut off entirely. Unfortunately this is a rapidly growing demographic as well and they’ve been brainwashed into believing Democrat=Good, Republican=Evil.
Groups 2. and 3. are not major factors. Group 1. and 4. are where the battle is being fought.
The checks have been cut off for four years ~ ever look at the REAL unemployment rate. Nothing got better with the Democrats in charge ~ they are so focused in playing doctor by memo they have no time for reality.
Ive sold 57 articles, many to the Homes section of my local paper. I wanted to write for the op/ed page and my editor laughed. To write on that page I had to be an actual employee so they could ensure the quality of the content. I took that to mean that I was appropriately left leaning. When I moved to town I actually thought the Tallahassee Democrat was the Democratic partys official newspaper; as you couldnt have slipped a piece of paper between their positions.
A friend and wonderful writer brought me a letter hed sent to the Democrat and what the Democrat published. The letter argued eloquently for concealed carry. What the Democrat published (and told him theyd edited for brevity) could have been written by somebody youd run from if confronted in public. I asked the editor why hed done that. He huffed, wiggled and snorted and said, I had to change it. Otherwise, how would people know what a nut case that guy was?
A reporter told me once, Its okay to lie about Republicans. It makes up for all the times they did sh*t and you just didnt catch them at it.
After laughing at me about the job my editor pointed to a stack of resumes thig- high and running the length of the wall. Those, she said, are just the resumes for the one reporter position we have open. Every one of them graduated with a liberal arts degree. You are an engineer. I suddenly realized that for at least a generation, in order to work in the media you had to have been steeped in liberal arts. I could not have passed a single course on that side of campus as even the art classes I was forced to take managed to include an unhealthy dollop of Communism.
The NYT will not die. It will shrink but it will not die, any more than liberalism will die with a Romney victory this fall.
The NYT serves the purpose of affirming a warped world view for its target niche audience. We are not that audience, but suckers are born every day.
Liberalism is based on lies, reason-less emotion, and revisionist history. To maintain the liberal world-view requires constant, constant affirmation in order to sustain itself. The NYT provides this in spades, as we all know, and liberals will continue to lap it up with a spoon. They crave legitimacy, they crave relevance, liberals must have confirmation that they’re right and we’re wrong. Constantly.
The current ownership may change, and the business will certainly have to be downsized, but the New York Times brand will not go away for a long, long time, IMHO.
Paging abb, paging abb. Please pick up the white courtesy telephone.
***The MSM has ruled us for 40 years at least,***
I just love that scene in DR STRANGELOVE in which they are discussing the “Doomsday Bomb”.
Russia built a bomb because the US was building a bomb, yet none of the US military personel knew of it.
Russian Ambassador: “Our source was the NEW YORK TIMES!”
Never in either yours or my life time.
Perhaps you have forgotten how they shilled for Uncle Joe Stalin back in the '30's and propped up FDR's redistributive socialism, and the political media incest that is/was the Kennedy-Sulzbergers's doing and that eventually married the Boston Globe to their fetid under-belly of the Gray Old Lady?
"All the News that Fits."
Like I said, never in either yours or my life time.
Correct me if I’m wrong, but weren’t 30 million people starved to death in one of the largest breadbaskets of the world, the Ukraine, during the 30’s?
And The New York Times didn’t print a word about it, even though they had reporters over there?
Just thought of it, didn’t the Times, or one of it’s reporters, get the Nobel prize, or some such, for that same time period?
Lincoln Steffens reporting from Russia for the New York Times, got the Pulitzer Prize. He was famous for coining the phrase, “I have seen the future, and it works.” to describe the Soviet Union. He was probably aware of the Ukranian famine. Steffens was a disgrace, but just about the only reporting out of the Soviet Union in those days was happy talk. It would have been difficult for countervailing ideas to get out.
It was Walter Duranty who reported for the NYT. My bad. Lincoln Steffens was that other jerk, who made the infamous, “I have seen the future...” comment.
Yes, and it was Duranty who decided to stop counting at 15 million.
If memory serves it was Duranty who coined the name, "Uncle Joe" for Stalin, with the clear intent to endear himself to the graces of his Moscow hosts in a journalistic sense even as was "Comrade" Armand Hammer was doing at the same time -- in an Occidental Petroleum industrialist's sense.
The bastardization of journalism at the New York Times has been with us for generations.
The MSM and Govt. have become synonymous with Democratic Party; Fox is centrist. For political news I go to Drudge and Free Republic.
I don’t think you need a liberal arts degree; I think you just have to toe the liberal line. A liberal arts degree is just a degree without a specific focus.
If the print media wants to survive they need to put the screws to their fellow travelers in the teachers’ unions: lib papers don’t sell in areas where lib parasites can’t even read.
Yes, similar to CNN concealing Saddam’s torture of many including one of their own employees and instead giving him favorable coverage.
A targeted boycott of only a few of the NYT’s top advertisers could put them under, or at least stir the pot. But conservatives don’t boycott much.