https://nypost.com/2019/08/11/the-new-york-times-modifies-its-motto-to-fit-leftist-agenda/
"The quaint motto is still there, but these days the Times doesn’t cover the news as much as promote an agenda. As it says repeatedly, the paper has a “mission.”
The mission is obvious: The Times aims to elect left-wing Democrats to virtually every office in the land and transform America culturally, educationally and politically.
As such, it operates as the chief cheerleader for the left, and one result is that many of its readers buy it because they agree with its politics. Specifically, they like the Times because they believe the paper hates President Trump as much as it does."
The headline read "Trump urges unity vs. racism." It comes after President Donald Trump addressed the nation after mass shootings in Dayton, Ohio, and El Paso, Texas, that killed nine and 22 people, respectively.
The headline ran in the Times' first print edition and was changed in subsequent editions, The Times told USA TODAY in a statement Tuesday.
The original headline didn't sit well with a number of Democrats.
"Let this front page serve as a reminder of how white supremacy is aided by – and often relies upon – the cowardice of mainstream institutions," tweeted Rep. Alexandra Ocasio-Cortez of New York.
Several Democrats took issue with the way The Times initially characterized Trump's response.
"Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT," 2020 presidential candidate Sen. Cory Booker (D-N.J.) said on Twitter. "Please do.”
Meanwhile, Republicans, including Trump, asserted that The Times gave in to Democrats' demands by altering the headline.
“’Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism,’ was the correct description in the first headline by the Failing New York Times, but it was quickly changed to, ‘Assailing Hate But Not Guns,’ after the Radical Left Democrats went absolutely CRAZY!” the president tweeted last week.
metmike: Wouldn't want to keep a headline that shows that Trump isn't really a racist!
There was a time when leftist institutions and leftist politicians attempted to hide their dishonesty. They'd pledge support for things like border control, opposition to socialism, etc. etc. Those days are gone.
Is this new found honesty the result of a "cockiness" that will cost them votes and support, or have their efforts for the last several decades to change the demographics of the US through "immigration reform", control of the media and education reached a point where their radical ideas are now mainstream?
The future of this country depends on the answer.
the Times is going thru a long hard death. It has a cancer, much like out current day FBI, that mist be eradicated before they are ever relevant again.
The cancer is in the Oval office
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cancer
Cancer is a group of diseases involving abnormal cell growth with the potential to invade or spread to other parts of the body.[2][8] These contrast with benign tumors, which do not spread.[8] Possible signs and symptoms include a lump, abnormal bleeding, prolonged cough, unexplained weight loss, and a change in bowel movements.[1] While these symptoms may indicate cancer, they can also have other causes.[1] Over 100 types of cancers affect humans.
Journalists and institutions everywhere in the MSM are violating their vows and professional ethics standards to get Trump out of office.
They are the left arm of the democratic party right now, working together to accomplish this.
They hate him, really hate him and want you and me to hate him too because he's a mean, very easy to hate guy.
Mission and Values-NY TImes
At The New York Times, our mission and values guide the work we do every day. By acting according to their spirit, we serve our readers and society, ensure the continued strength of our journalism and business, and foster a healthy and vibrant Times culture.
https://www.nytco.com/company/mission-and-values/
We seek the truth and help people understand the world.
This mission is rooted in our belief that great journalism has the power to make each reader’s life richer and more fulfilling, and all of society stronger and more just.
Our Values
Independence
Over a hundred years ago, The Times pledged “to give the news impartially, without fear or favor, regardless of party, sect, or interests involved.” That commitment remains true today: We follow the truth, wherever it leads.
Integrity
The trust of our readers is essential. We renew that trust every day through the actions and judgment of all our employees — in our journalism, in our workplace and in public.
Curiosity
Open-minded inquiry is at the heart of our mission. In all our work, we believe in continually asking questions, seeking out different perspectives and searching for better ways of doing things.
Respect
We help a global audience understand a vast and diverse world. To do that fully and fairly, we treat our subjects, our readers and each other with empathy and respect.
Collaboration
It takes creativity and expertise from people in every part of the company to fulfill our mission. We are at our best when we work together and support each other.
Excellence
We aim to set the standard in everything we do. The pursuit of excellence takes different forms, but in every context, we strive to deliver the very best.
metmike: Those are just words.........which is what a newspaper sells for money.
by Byron York
August 15, 2019 08:18 PM
Exact same thing with CNN:
https://cnnsoc185.wordpress.com/vision-statement/
Sensationalism
"CNN aims to provide breaking news to its viewers without any biases or distortion of the facts. Due to the highly controversial nature of many subjects related to politics and world news, CNN balances all information provided by interviewing and seeking information from knowledgeable experts on each side of the topic."
They are busted on the next page!
"Avenatti was interviewed on broadcast and cable news networks 214 times from March to November 2018"
https://dailycaller.com/2019/03/25/avenatti-cnn-msnbc-interviews-before-indictment/
https://www.lamag.com/citythinkblog/michael-avenatti-prison/
Michael Avenatti Faces 36 New Counts and Up to 335 Years in prison.
And that's in addition to their round the clock falsely painting Trump as a traitor and law breaker for colluding with Russia for 2.5 years.
What about all the attacks on attorney general Barr?
What about Judge Kavanaugh last year?
After seeing the above evidence of what they REALLY broadcast vs what they say they broadcast, the rest of what they say below has no credibility:
Objectivity
CNN’s objective is to provide the best possible news coverage to the public. We want to provide our audience with a broad variety of news, not just news about what is happening in Washington or in the Middle East. CNN strives to provide the most neutral and unbiased stories to our audience so that they can obtain the most accurate information. We consider a range of varying perspectives and treat controversial subjects, as well as all other subjects, with impartiality.
Fairness
CNN is fair to those who contribute to the research and also to the viewers. We respect the contributor’s privacy. We make sure to gain legal access to content before we begin recording on private property. CNN treats all subjects of news coverage with respect and dignity, without discrimination. We present a diversity of expressions, perspectives, and ideas. We deliver accurate information because we are devoted to gaining the trust of our audience.
Integrity
At CNN, integrity is the ultimate importance to the brand. Structures are created to maintain it. Stories are viewed by producers, other organizations, and at times even lawyers before they are announced to the public. Our aim is not to address a certain point of view but to deliver comprehensive journalism. CNN does not plagiarize its news. In addition to the integrity of our news, CNN believes in upholding the integrity of its viewers by providing them with objective news with the intention that the viewers are fully capable of forming intellectual and analytical observations and ideas based on the facts provided to them.
metmike: After reading this stuff written above by CNN, I would say that most of it is ........the complete opposite of what they do with President Trump. I watch CNN for several hours each week.
I don't ever watch CNBC but understand it's the same way there too.
Even if you agree with them 100% about all the bad things related to Trump, it's doesn't negate them blatantly violating these mission statements with the one sided coverage, the quinessential example being condemning Trump for 2.5 years on colluding with Russia for something that he did not do.
CNN had Michael Avenatti, the least credible guy on the planet on every day for 3 months for a daily Trump bashing session..............because he was the perfect guy to sell the hate Trump snake oil!!!
Amazing thread of opinions from someone who does not read the NY times. Kind of like having an opinion of a book when having only read the review.
"Amazing thread of opinions from someone who does not read the NY times."
I would not have made those comments if I didn't watch CNN and read the NY Times(probably less than 2 dozen articles a week though and most of them are political since those are what get my attention without having the paid subscription).
My brother Gary has had a subscription to the NYT since 1983 and sends me some good articles. My points here only relate to Donald Trump.
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/19/health/planned-parenthood-title-x.html
Already a subscriber? Log in
Addition: August 21: I get this emailed to me from the NYTimes every morning:
Your Wednesday Briefing
Getting too much email?
The New York Times <nytdirect@nytimes.com>
Wed 8/21/2019 4:48 AM
| ||||||||||
joj,
I'm glad that you decided to pop in.
Please answer my question that I've asked you a couple of times now:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/37062/
Re: Re: Re: Destroying our Institutions
By metmike - Aug. 18, 2019, 11:25 p.m.
joj,
I'm still waiting for you to respond to my question about why you made up this statement about me:
"But criticizing Obama is WHAT Mike?
'Cause you were dishing it out pretty good there for the last few years."
ok Joj, here is your chance to regain some badly needed credibility here at the forum. Do please tells us where and when MM has been wrong about the NT Times. Their job is to report. The why, where, how and when. They have failed badly and lost their audience. Without the web they would be out of business and rightfully so. How could they be so wrong and yet you so right....both cannot be.
mcfarm,
I would prefer not to waste time debating over the NY TImes point on Trump because I can't prove it definitively as I did CNN. They are actually not as bad as CNN and joj reads the NYTimes (and may be offended) so I would also prefer not to bash a paper that has alot of really good stuff in it to................but they ARE very biased on Trump which is the point.
Also, I'm sure they have written plenty of unbiased articles about him to go with the blatant bias, so showing an unbiased one is not evidence of them not being biased.
What I would prefer however, no......what I insist on is joj answer my question from the last post
joj?
Keeping in mind, that joj received a copy of a post by me last month, defining clearly how I feel about bashing Obama:
https://www.marketforum.com/forum/topic/34963/
Re: A great article on why supporting Trump,in spite of his flaws, is the right thing for the US.
By metmike - July 21, 2019, 7 p.m.
"Tim,
I don't consider this one of your better posts.
It's nothing but an Obama bashing post for the sake of bashing Obama from a person that obviously hates Obama.
Also, it's best with posts to include the link, along with the title/source, then, below that a few key points..........not the entire article.
I certainly get very long winded with my own post, using my own words............ but please try to avoid putting entire articles from other sources."
Scroll down at the link below:
I had originally intended for these messages to be posted on this thread..........sorry about that:
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trump Hates America
By metmike - Aug. 20, 2019, 6:40 p.m.
Tim,
I apologize if it appears as if I'm picking on you again.....by using you as an example. The lib side is convinced that I do the same thing to them.
==================================
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trump Hates America
By TimNew - Aug. 21, 2019, 4:38 a.m.
Oh heck, I'm not that thin skinned. You had an opinion about an article I posted, and by forum standards, posting an entire article without some sort of source is wrong. I've pointed that out myself a time or two.
It's a recent exampleof you, as moderator,enforcing forum standards,regardless of the slant/opinion.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Trump Hates America
By metmike - Aug. 21, 2019, 11:44 a.m.
Thanks Tim,
That's one of the many things that I like about you.
I actually intended for that message to go on to another thread in a discussion with joj and messed up but will transfer it now.
+++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
This is what I get every morning in my mailbox. Here are the last 3 days below.
I mention this because the NY Times does have some wonderful articles and objective stuff. They are not CNN or CNBC when it comes to making one sided, unsubstatiated attacks based on lies and speculation(except on the fake climate crisis, where they are leading the charge of the hijacking of climate science for political agenda).
But I read them and they are very biased about Trump in my opinion... almost never making positive comments on positive things related to him and often emphasizing the negatives without balance from the other side.
The New York Times
|
|
|
|
|
|
joj,
I'm still waiting for you to respond to my question about why you made up this statement about me:
"But criticizing Obama is WHAT Mike?
'Cause you were dishing it out pretty good there for the last few years."
Sorry that I have to do this to you dude but you should know by now, that I hold posters accountable for statements(will ask for evidence on made up stuff and I will show the evidence that it's false), especially attacks on others or accusations.
metmike
We shouldn't forget about the Washington Post:
With regards to the buying of Greenland, The NY Times refers to it as a joke in their article today. They twist things to maximize the negative spin on Trump looking bad.
White House Memo
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/21/us/politics/trump-greenland-prime-minister.html
metmike: A joke, really? As I showed earlier, it's actually a brilliant idea. At least one MSM source is able to see that clearly.
https://www.cnbc.com/2019/08/21/heres-why-trump-wants-to-buy-greenland.html
Key Points
metmike: This is another example of "most" of the MSM taking a brilliant idea that came from Trump and twisting it into an "absurd", "joke" coming from a lunatic.
I will agree that Trump is a lunatic..............but some of his idea's are genius! Maybe this one ties into his decades of developing real estate and seeing the value of properties.
metmike: Why is it that "almost" no MSM sources will recognize the no brainer benefits to the US owning Greenland, which would also benefit Denmark?
Trump over reacted to having his offer rejected of course but the MSM wants you to think that his idea was really absurd and Denmark's response was the right one, to call it absurd.............but his idea/offer was NOT absurd.
You see, if the MSM told us that Trump's idea was actually a brilliant one, then they couldn't twist this situation like a pretzel into him being absurd, making a crazy/joke of an offer and then getting upset when (what really was a brilliant idea) got called "absurd".
Trump knows that his idea was brilliant(even if Denmark is not likely to be interested) and it just makes him even more angry that his enemies are convincing people otherwise.
