If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(The New York Times)   About that whole "the NYT is a liberal rag" thing   (green.blogs.nytimes.com) divider line 52
    More: Dumbass, NYT  
•       •       •

3869 clicks; posted to Politics » on 03 Mar 2013 at 8:25 AM (1 year ago)   |  Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



52 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all
 
2013-03-03 12:52:43 AM
uhhh, just because they are liberal does not mean they are stupid.

smart move.
 
2013-03-03 01:02:59 AM
Eh, I don't care if they have a Green Blog.  But they always seemed conservative to me, in the sense of being old, established, resistant to change.  Granted, not like the 'conservative movement' which is loud, flashy, sadistic, and completely dishonest at all times.
 
2013-03-03 07:23:18 AM
Judith Miller.
 
2013-03-03 08:36:44 AM
i18.photobucket.com
Well, youy know - eye of the beholder, and all that jazz.
 
2013-03-03 08:37:16 AM
Since they didn't disavow global warming and evolution while announcing a return to two paper editions a day because fark TREES, they're still a liberal rag in the eyes of those who so desperately need to believe it.
 
2013-03-03 08:39:45 AM
They are a liberal rag.

And worshipping at the altar of the Church of Global Warming isn't as profitable as it used to be.
 
2013-03-03 08:39:52 AM
Journalism is dead.
 
2013-03-03 08:40:27 AM

netcentric: They are a liberal rag.

And worshipping at the altar of the Church of Global Warming isn't as profitable as it used to be.


0/10

Too obvious for my taste.
 
2013-03-03 08:41:48 AM

Alphax: But they always seemed conservative to me, in the sense of being old, established, resistant to change.  Granted, not like the 'conservative movement' which is loud, flashy, sadistic, and completely dishonest at all times.


Remember how critical they were of Bush after 9/11 and in the beginning of the Iraq War?

Neither do I.

/Liberal Media my ass
 
2013-03-03 08:52:07 AM
They haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower. That is saying something.
 
2013-03-03 08:54:17 AM

TheGreatGazoo: They haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower. That is saying something.


It does...it says a lot about what happened to the Republican party after Eisenhower.
 
2013-03-03 08:55:10 AM

TheGreatGazoo: They haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower. That is saying something.


Is that saying something about the NYT or Republicans?
 
2013-03-03 08:56:12 AM

Mrtraveler01: TheGreatGazoo: They haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower. That is saying something.

It does...it says a lot about what happened to the Republican party after Eisenhower.


Heh.
 
2013-03-03 08:56:41 AM
Conservatives whine about the NYT being liberal, but they treat it like the Font Of All Wisdom when it suits them to quote it as a credible source and an affirmation of whatever idea they're pushing.
 
2013-03-03 09:09:59 AM
My grandpa assured me that it is.

Also, Hubert Humphrey is a communist and only negroes smoke acid.
 
2013-03-03 09:14:45 AM
From the last Liberal LMSM Mainstream media thread:

From what I can gather, the most watched cable news network is Fox News, the most listened to news/politics radio host is Rush Limbaugh. According to the current New York Times best seller list, the #1 non-fiction book has the decidedly non-liberal title of "American Sniper" by Chris Kyle. the biggest selling non-USA Today newspaper in the US in 2011 (the most recent I could find figures for with a quick Google) was The Wall Street Journal.

I assume the most popular news network, real newspaper, book, and radio host would count as the Mainstream Media, and all of them are Republican/conservative-leaning. There is no Liberal Mainstream Media in the USA.
 
2013-03-03 09:20:56 AM

LucklessWonder: From the last Liberal LMSM Mainstream media thread:

From what I can gather, the most watched cable news network is Fox News, the most listened to news/politics radio host is Rush Limbaugh. According to the current New York Times best seller list, the #1 non-fiction book has the decidedly non-liberal title of "American Sniper" by Chris Kyle. the biggest selling non-USA Today newspaper in the US in 2011 (the most recent I could find figures for with a quick Google) was The Wall Street Journal.

I assume the most popular news network, real newspaper, book, and radio host would count as the Mainstream Media, and all of them are Republican/conservative-leaning. There is no Liberal Mainstream Media in the USA.


It's funny to watch Fox News harp on about the "Mainstream Media" while simultaneously bragging that they're #1 in cable news.

Lucky for them, their target viewers are too dense to pick up on the contradiction.
 
2013-03-03 09:23:39 AM
The NYT was anti-occupy, pro-war, and pro-patriot act.  They're as Liberal as the Democratic party.  (Not at all.)

Want to see an actual "Liberal" platform?   Here you go (PDF Warning)
 
2013-03-03 09:34:05 AM
I had to do a report on media ownership for a class back in college. In the research I found one "foundation" that called CNN conservative for having too many white businessmen talking about capitalist ideas.

/The worst part was when I found out that 90% of media is owned by 5 companies.
 
2013-03-03 09:51:41 AM
I'm always amazed at how my fellow liberals can easily see how Faux News and talk radio is conservative, yet fail to see how liberal most of the rest of the media is.  I can't figure out if it's willful ignorance, or just plain ignorance, but it is definitely sad to witness.


And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
-Mathew 7:3
 
2013-03-03 09:53:05 AM

Descartes: I'm always amazed at how my fellow liberals can easily see how Faux News and talk radio is conservative, yet fail to see how liberal most of the rest of the media is.  I can't figure out if it's willful ignorance, or just plain ignorance, but it is definitely sad to witness.


And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
-Mathew 7:3


But I come to you, only out of concern...
 
2013-03-03 09:57:41 AM

wildcardjack: I had to do a report on media ownership for a class back in college. In the research I found one "foundation" that called CNN conservative for having too many white businessmen talking about capitalist ideas.

/The worst part was when I found out that 90% of media is owned by 5 companies.


So do you disagree that CNN is conservative? Many, many scholars and writers have pointed out that "white businessmen talking about capitalist ideas" (or the like) is treated as the normal, default position in US culture and other points of view are treated as deviant or inferior.  CNN doesn't do a single thing that could be considered a serious critique of the overall political or economic system; that makes them pretty conservative in my book.  Conservative meaning supportive of the status quo, not Republican.
 
2013-03-03 09:58:54 AM

Descartes: I'm always amazed at how my fellow liberals can easily see how Faux News and talk radio is conservative, yet fail to see how liberal most of the rest of the media is.  I can't figure out if it's willful ignorance, or just plain ignorance, but it is definitely sad to witness.


And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
-Mathew 7:3


8/10, that's some pretty good trolling.
 
2013-03-03 09:59:32 AM

Descartes: I'm always amazed at how my fellow liberals can easily see how Faux News and talk radio is conservative, yet fail to see how liberal most of the rest of the media is.  I can't figure out if it's willful ignorance, or just plain ignorance, but it is definitely sad to witness.


And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
-Mathew 7:3


Whoa...I'm experiencing the same thing right now!
 
2013-03-03 10:01:46 AM
Hot is cold, up is down, dogs living with cats, etc.
 
2013-03-03 10:02:35 AM

Descartes: I'm always amazed at how my fellow liberals can easily see how Faux News and talk radio is conservative, yet fail to see how liberal most of the rest of the media is.  I can't figure out if it's willful ignorance, or just plain ignorance, but it is definitely sad to witness.


And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
-Mathew 7:3


Just because virtually everything is to the left of talk radio and Fox doesn't make it liberal.
 
2013-03-03 10:07:35 AM

Descartes: I'm always amazed at how my fellow liberals can easily see how Faux News and talk radio is conservative, yet fail to see how liberal most of the rest of the media is.  I can't figure out if it's willful ignorance, or just plain ignorance, but it is definitely sad to witness.


And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother's eye,
but considerest not the beam that is in thine own eye?
-Mathew 7:3


"Fellow liberals" my ass.  Funny how you're one of the only "liberals" on the site who thought Solyndra was a big deal instead of a dumb talking point blown way out of proportion.

http://www.fark.com/comments/7140624/77245940#c77245940

There was this, too.

http://www.fark.com/comments/7052561

Of course, I don't expect a response because you very much seem to be of the "take a shiat in a thread and then leave" style of poster.
 
2013-03-03 10:15:38 AM

Mrtraveler01: It's funny to watch Fox News harp on about the "Mainstream Media" while simultaneously bragging that they're #1 in cable news.


The largest fish is but a small percentage of the entire biomass of all fish.

What I'm trying to say is it's fallacious to say because Fox News is the #1 news television channel it doesn't make it holds the majority viewpoint of news agencies.

Bored Horde: The NYT was anti-occupy, pro-war, and pro-patriot act. They're as Liberal as the Democratic party. (Not at all.)


Of course not being against something makes you for it. The NYT reporting of the Iraq war was later described as uncritical of pro-war propaganda. A bity different than saying they were pro-war.

Of course that assumes that being for war is an unliberal position. Because suddenly then there's never been a liberal in the history of the world.

As to the PATRIOT Act, the Times wasn't pro-PATRIOT Act. They criticized it several times through Bush's first administration and even got pilloried for misrepresenting it. Even at times "sexying up" abuse allegations sparked by the PATRIOT Act.

Here's some of the original reporting from the NYT on the passage of the PATRIOT Act. It includes in the report some of the assertions of abuses possible under it. Does that sound like a report someone in favor if the bill would put out? Here, have a look at the archives.
 
2013-03-03 10:19:17 AM

Mrbogey: What I'm trying to say is it's fallacious to say because Fox News is the #1 news television channel it doesn't make it holds the majority viewpoint of news agencies.


True, other news agencies aren't propaganda mouthpieces for the GOP.
 
2013-03-03 10:20:54 AM

Mrbogey: What I'm trying to say is it's fallacious to say because Fox News is the #1 news television channel it doesn't make it holds the majority viewpoint of news agencies.


The viewpoint of news agencies is irrelevant when talking about "mainstream media".

The fact that it's the most watch of the cable news stations makes it part of the mainstream media because it's a popular media outlet that a lot of Americans turn to for their news. It isn't some alternative newspaper or anything.

Conservatives just make up some BS definition because the actual definition of "mainstream media" doesn't agree with their agenda.
 
2013-03-03 10:22:15 AM

Mrbogey: As to the PATRIOT Act, the Times wasn't pro-PATRIOT Act. They criticized it several times through Bush's first administration and even got pilloried for misrepresenting it. Even at times "sexying up" abuse allegations sparked by the PATRIOT Act.


I like how you avoid linking directly to the NY Post and Weekly Standard.  Good try that nobody might not notice.
 
2013-03-03 10:27:03 AM

Fart_Machine: Mrbogey: As to the PATRIOT Act, the Times wasn't pro-PATRIOT Act. They criticized it several times through Bush's first administration and even got pilloried for misrepresenting it. Even at times "sexying up" abuse allegations sparked by the PATRIOT Act.

I like how you avoid linking directly to the NY Post and Weekly Standard.  Good try that nobody might not notice.


If you can't trust the Manhattan Institute, who can you trust?
 
2013-03-03 10:37:41 AM

Fart_Machine: I like how you avoid linking directly to the NY Post and Weekly Standard. Good try that nobody might not notice.


The MI links turned up first when I was searching. I figured why bother going any further since it had what I wanted. Is it scandalous that I linked back to a repository of the story and not tried to track down the original webpage it was published on?
 
2013-03-03 10:43:38 AM

Mrbogey: Fart_Machine: I like how you avoid linking directly to the NY Post and Weekly Standard. Good try that nobody might not notice.

The MI links turned up first when I was searching. I figured why bother going any further since it had what I wanted. Is it scandalous that I linked back to a repository of the story and not tried to track down the original webpage it was published on?


So you don't actually read what you link then or didn't realize that the "criticism" against them was a joke.
 
2013-03-03 11:11:32 AM
Are we still pretending that the editorial board of the NYT is not center left?
That's nice.

/best paper out there imo
//let's not be blatantly dishonest though
///cue Iraq war
 
2013-03-03 11:13:18 AM

skullkrusher: Are we still pretending that the editorial board of the NYT is not center left?
That's nice.

/best paper out there imo
//let's not be blatantly dishonest though
///cue Iraq war


Center-Left is basically to the left of Stalin and Mao according to the Fox News viewers so that's a pretty accurate assessment.

/thinks he's center-left himself
 
2013-03-03 11:22:05 AM

Mrtraveler01: skullkrusher: Are we still pretending that the editorial board of the NYT is not center left?
That's nice.

/best paper out there imo
//let's not be blatantly dishonest though
///cue Iraq war

Center-Left is basically to the left of Stalin and Mao according to the Fox News viewers so that's a pretty accurate assessment.

/thinks he's center-left himself


the NYT is by no means a radical left paper; there is a reason people take it seriously after all.
 
2013-03-03 11:30:41 AM

skullkrusher: Are we still pretending that the editorial board of the NYT is not center left?


You believe the editorial board represents all reporting by the paper?
 
2013-03-03 11:55:19 AM

TheGreatGazoo: They haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower. That is saying something.


The Republican party hasn't nominated a respectable candidate, or even a decent human being, since Eisenhower.
 
2013-03-03 01:09:41 PM

Garble: TheGreatGazoo: They haven't endorsed a Republican since Eisenhower. That is saying something.

The Republican party hasn't nominated a respectable candidate, or even a decent human being, since Eisenhower.




Still haven't forgiven Jerry Ford for signing off on the Warren Commission report?

 
2013-03-03 01:11:51 PM

Fart_Machine: skullkrusher: Are we still pretending that the editorial board of the NYT is not center left?

You believe the editorial board represents all reporting by the paper?


what are you trying for here? Just have out with it. It sounds like it's gonna be dumb.
 
2013-03-03 01:54:56 PM

skullkrusher: Fart_Machine: skullkrusher: Are we still pretending that the editorial board of the NYT is not center left?

You believe the editorial board represents all reporting by the paper?

what are you trying for here? Just have out with it. It sounds like it's gonna be dumb.


Someone named Fart_Machine saying something dumb? That unpossible!
(yes, I know...bad faux German...bricks...glass houses...)

But he is absolutely correct. The political slant of the editorial board of a newspaper does not necessarily represent the political slant of the entire newspaper.
 
2013-03-03 02:03:42 PM

Krieghund: skullkrusher: Fart_Machine: skullkrusher: Are we still pretending that the editorial board of the NYT is not center left?

You believe the editorial board represents all reporting by the paper?

what are you trying for here? Just have out with it. It sounds like it's gonna be dumb.

Someone named Fart_Machine saying something dumb? That unpossible!
(yes, I know...bad faux German...bricks...glass houses...)

But he is absolutely correct. The political slant of the editorial board of a newspaper does not necessarily represent the political slant of the entire newspaper.


that's what we speak of when talking about the political slant of a paper. The slant of the editors. They are the ones who control the content. They write the editorials. They approve the outside opinion pieces.
 
2013-03-03 03:12:53 PM
2wolves: Judith Miller.
 
2013-03-03 03:41:58 PM
i.imgur.com

"The Media is too liberal."
"Where'd you hear that?"
"The Media."
 
2013-03-03 04:05:36 PM
The NYT leans strongly left in their editorial section.  No question.

...but Fox has told me for years that editorial slants have zero influence on the "news" section of publishing.  Opinion is opinion and news is news.

So which one is it?
 
2013-03-03 05:43:49 PM

skullkrusher: that's what we speak of when talking about the political slant of a paper. The slant of the editors. They are the ones who control the content. They write the editorials. They approve the outside opinion pieces.


Fun fact:  Members of the Editorial board aren't the ones who judge story content in the rest of the paper.  But keep on derping you crazy diamond.
 
2013-03-03 07:02:03 PM
The NYT is a division of the Likud Party's PR Dept.

Judith Miller proved that.
 
2013-03-03 10:31:11 PM
The NYT  is a liberal rag. It's just that environmentalism has been thoroughly abandoned by liberals. Despite the fuss over the Keystone pipeline (a joke at that - the oil gets over the border in trains and trucks anyway), Obama has not done much for the environment. He keeps talking about "all of the above" energy approaches, which is fundamentally ecologically unsound. Even an easy give-away to environmentalists like banning mountaintop removal mining has not happened.

Environmentalism is a dead movement. Nobody cares, even about their own backyard. We got rid of the obvious stuff, burning rivers and heavy smog, and we've called that good enough even though we still have a long way to go to a healthy environment and healthy ecosystems. Sad but true.
 
2013-03-03 11:36:30 PM
The idea that the NYT is some sort of bastion of liberalism is a canard that was exposed during the build up to the Iraq war. Specifically but not exclusively Judith Miller's propaganda pieces cheering that madness on. The myth that America's "Document of Record" (as it likes to pride itself) is some sort of liberal touchstone is largely based on the fact that editorially it isn't batshiat insane. It doesn't think the AGW issue is a centuries old hoax or that gay people should be second class citizens.

That's a pretty low bar for defining "liberal".

Mostly it frames the national debate on issues within parameters accepted by the status quo.
 
Displayed 50 of 52 comments

First | « | 1 | 2 | » | Last | Show all

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »






Report