General Discussion

dpibel

(3,560 posts)

20. Fair or not fair?

Thu Mar 27, 2025, 11:45 PM

Mar 27

You maintain that the NYT attacks on the Clintons and Biden, and support for GW's groundless war were correct?

Sure. They do some serious reportage. But to pretend that there's any sort of balance to the damage that they've done ("responsible journalism involves offending all sides is meaningful only if, long term, it balances out) is, frankly, counterfactual. They occasionally say something ill about Mr. Trump. Therefore, they can be forgiven for a 40 year history of bashing Democrats. That's, for lack of a better word, fatuous.

I congratulate you on trotting out a straw man! You are a wise and balanced and insightful person, whilst I am but a foolish person in search of a mouthpiece for 'my side' [sic].

You seem to believe that pointing out blatant bias in the NYT's coverage is a demand that they be a mouthpiece.

On edit: Do what you said you can do. Point out the "loads." I have, after all, given you a considerable (so far unrefuted) load of NYT Dem-slagging.

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

27 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

NYT pro-level both-sidesing [View all] dpibel Mar 27 OP

Rhetorical question: Why is anyone still reading or subscribing to the NYTs. jrthin Mar 27 #1

No SocialDemocrat61 Mar 27 #2

Sad how far that paper has fallen. And the RW claims it's "way to the left kerry-is-my-prez Mar 27 #11

Not to DU's high standards. maxsolomon Mar 27 #18

we aren't PAYING them to check in with "The White Lotus" while discussing secure material lapfog_1 Mar 27 #3

also a fairly cogent (and accessible) handling of the issue stopdiggin Mar 27 #4

The NYTs give w/one hand and takes back w/the other. jrthin Mar 27 #8

as opposed to those that are busy shoveling manure stopdiggin Mar 27 #10

Then stop following the particular argument that has circle "round, and done to the point jrthin Mar 27 #12

nah. as long as someone feels obligated to trot out a particular tired old saw stopdiggin Mar 27 #15

At least you concede the bias dpibel Mar 27 #17

I can point to 'loads' of reporting where the Times has taken a chunk out of Republicans stopdiggin Mar 27 #19

Fair or not fair? dpibel Mar 27 #20

what on earth makes you think I should (or would) be compelled stopdiggin Friday #21

This you? dpibel Friday #22

if I WANTED to, yes. stopdiggin Friday #23

There's always the supporting your argument part dpibel Friday #24

the 'argument' doesn't need support stopdiggin Friday #26

The way that they diminish the importance: Oh, you want to watch White Lotus Prairie Gates Mar 27 #5

Y'know, that server Hillary Clinton had Bettie Mar 27 #6

It's Regime media. bronxiteforever Mar 27 #7

"the morning" IS editorial. maxsolomon Mar 27 #9

News analysis, actually dpibel Mar 27 #14

"News Analysis" gives reporters leeway to include opinion maxsolomon Friday #27

I check Fox most days there's a big screwup hoping to see some sanity. kerry-is-my-prez Mar 27 #13

Jaw dropping. Ms. Toad Mar 27 #16

You'd almost think there was an agenda... dpibel Friday #25