New York Magazine has a new piece about the New York Times’ shift away from journalism and toward activism “in the Trump years.”
And it’s illuminating, to say the least:
The first screenshot is about the NYT staff response to the Tom Cotton op-ed. The second screenshot is about the NYT staff response to the CCP-authored op-ed on Hong Kong.https://t.co/NXEgru37qQ pic.twitter.com/9zf9nC5hDp
— JERRY DUNLEAVY (@JerryDunleavy) November 9, 2020
Notice a difference?
NYT staff: Couldn’t get mad at real oppressor, too exhausted from the fake one. pic.twitter.com/Pdm4C1m1Vw
— Michael Brendan Dougherty (@michaelbd) November 9, 2020
Hey, man. We get it.
It's exhausting spending all your time getting an op-ed editor fired for allowing a US Senator to write about stopping rioting and looting. Doesn't leave energy for being upset at China subjecting a free state to complete tyranny and propagandizing about it on your op-ed page. https://t.co/xZCp52O9AE
— Ben Shapiro (@benshapiro) November 9, 2020
This is weak. The lack of internal outrage over the Hong Kong op-ed — defending an authoritarian crackdown in a place where the NYT has dozens of employees — shows the fundamental fakeness of complaints about the Cotton op-ed as a workplace safety issue. https://t.co/t1I6sbBWzZ pic.twitter.com/MHcKSr7q0v
— Josh Barro (@jbarro) November 9, 2020
Maybe because the New York Times practices fundamentally fake journalism.
Hyperbole fails when trying to describe the work atmosphere at the New York Times. "Inmates running the asylum" is so cliche but fits this situation perfectly. I can't believe people willingly subject themselves to this environment. https://t.co/vrt0rDfdXs
— Noam Blum (@neontaster) November 9, 2020
As long as there are masochists, there will be people willing to work at the New York Times.
They are indeed the enemy of the people. https://t.co/syxC1ozQAa
— HouseRepEEE (@EEElverhoy) November 9, 2020
To change your comments display name, click here.