Full story: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2017/07/new-york-times-washington-post-donald-trump?utm_source=newsletter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=newsletter_axiosam&stream=top-stories
Perhaps they should try reporting real news, rather than trying to create news, or reporting outright lies and fabrications? That might be a good start for them to regain their credibility with the public.
I don't know whether there's much I'd like in the New York Times, but contrary to popular opinion, the Washington Post isn't just ceaseless leftism. For example, they score a lot of points with me for being the home of civil liberties journalist Radley Balko and for being the home of the "Volokh Conspiracy", a group blog of mostly-originalist law professors.
Grade school, 1950s NYC. Had a teacher who was a bug on having us read newspapers each day, her strong preference being the NYT. But... She told us that everything we read is biased for having been written by a real person. Some articles are bylined and most are not but all are written by some person or persons.
The NYT is great to read to get the main talking points. They're great a pointing the way for lots and lots of people. I find lots of truth in NYT's articles. That truth is usually just buried 7-8 paragraphs in. And, to my continued amusement, those later paragraphs are contrary to the headline. My favorite one was about gun control and the evil of the NRA. About 3/4 of the way down they had statistics that showed NRA members perpetrated less than .01% of gun crimes in America. And even those statistics were spurious because they also included lawful use of a firearm (home invaders, etc). Wish I still had that link, it was awesome. I'm not and never will be a member of the NRA. Lately a lot of articles on education, especially outcomes along racial lines are real good reads. You get the "good speak" assimilative pandering for their base in the headline and one or two paragraphs in and then the meat further down. Good stuff. Great ones about which schools are failing and why. "The gap", all very interesting to read for how far down in the sand most peoples heads are about reality. So no, I don't want to the NYT's to go away, it's my "funny papers".
If more guns truly equals more crime, as the left wants you to believe, then why doesn't every NRA convention devolve into a bloody massacre? Or gun shows, for that matter? Or police conventions?
Fabrications like this one? https://assets.documentcloud.org/documents/3906804/Seth-Rich-Fox-News.pdf
About 80,000 people attend the NRA Convention every year. Number of mass shootings at NRA Conventions, ever, = 0 Sorry those very real numbers don't fit your narrative. You're citing a lawsuit as evidence? Seriously?? Didn't Florida State teach you about verifiable sources? I can file a lawsuit against you for destroying my marriage, never mind that my marriage is intact and you've done nothing to interfere with it, anyway. Anyone can sue anyone for anything, not to mention that a lawsuit demand is the obviously biased story of one side, and that many lawsuits are settled because the defendant(s) don't want the hassle. I was referring to fabrications like this; completely forged documents that NBC ran with and never checked their legitimacy. http://msnbcmedia.msn.com/i/msnbc/Sections/News/Politics/BushGuardDocs.PDF Or this kind of fabrication; http://metro.co.uk/2017/01/11/dossier-claims-trump-watched-prostitutes-perform-golden-shower-on-bed-obamas-slept-in-6373907/
Except statement "more guns cause more crime" does not have a variable "NRA member" anywhere. Picking up these kinds of inference errors is a common thing on the GRE. Fox created and ran an unsubstantiated story alleging links between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks, and had to retract it. That's the fact. A story was concocted by a fellow named Ed Bukowsky who claimed to do it on behalf of the White House and Trump himself - these are unproven allegations. The story was discussed with Sean Spicer prior to publication - that's acknowledged by Sean Spicer. In any case, Fox was spreading fake news. NBC fell for a hoax. Are you telling me Fox never rushed an unproven but politically convenient story? I don't have an example on this (I mean other than Seth Rich story above) but my best guess I'll be able to find one. Along with studies showing Fox audience is significantly more likely to believe duds like Birtherism. So, are you making a claim Fox never did that? All these stories report on the existence of the dossier, which is a fact. Not one story claims everything in the dossier is true. My best bet is that the dossier is accurate for what it is: meaning that someone in Steele's employ did meet a Russian source who told them about the golden showers. I'd say it's also very possible that this was a tall tale Russian source sold Steele, either just for money or as desinformatsiya. The dossier as a whole was believable enough to brief the President about it. Your point...?
