1171
This was published in October 2024
(lemmy.nz)
The front page of the New York Times. 5 days before the election.
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 30 Aug 2026
1171 points (98.7% liked)
pics
29677 readers
515 users here now
Rules:
1.. Please mark original photos with [OC] in the title if you're the photographer
2..Pictures containing a politician from any country or planet are prohibited, this is a community voted on rule.
3.. Image must be a photograph, no AI or digital art.
4.. No NSFW/Cosplay/Spam/Trolling images.
5.. Be civil. No racism or bigotry.
Photo of the Week Rule(s):
1.. On Fridays, the most upvoted original, marked [OC], photo posted between Friday and Thursday will be the next week's banner and featured photo.
2.. The weekly photos will be saved for an end of the year run off.
Instance-wide rules always apply. https://mastodon.world/about
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
The news section actually DOES use those words.
"Israel Is Committing Genocide in Gaza, U.N. Inquiry Says"*
"In a First, Leading Israeli Rights Groups Accuse Israel of Gaza Genocide"*
They regularly use these words as a quote.
For instance:
"Human Rights Watch and Amnesty International both accuse Israel of ethnic cleansing and genocide, charges that the Israeli government denies"
They just don't throw inflammatory statements. This is the news section of a major newspaper. It’s not a leftist blog.
Most of the time, this was a quote:
They quoted David Crowley and college professor Erik Bleich.
Regading Howard Zinn, he was indeed divisive.
I don't see anything wrong with that title. Conservative politicians have occasionally proposed or pushed to ban Zinn's book. Some liberal historians also criticized his book.
https://newrepublic.com/article/213778/howard-zinn-biography-simple-story-american-history
Don't get me wrong. I actually like the guy. But he was indeed divisive.
I think it's crazy to allow people to have guns. But it's fair to say gun laws are a divisive issue in the United States. The word "divisive" isn't inherently bad. It's a description.
Biden's age was indeed a major concern. If they didn't cover it, they would have been accused of a cover up.
Their coverage of Trump was extremely good and extensive:
https://www.nytimes.com/2024/10/20/us/politics/trump-scandals.html?unlocked_article_code=1.9lA.JcRG.vJBN_JxcpUEu
https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2024/10/30/us/politics/trump-administration-criticism.html?unlocked_article_code=1.9lA.RUg5.mzo6XR9KTllf
Americans voted for him. That's their choice.
The NYT is just as much to blame as the Washington Post, etc. They have all played major roles in sane-washing the literal fascism that is now strangling our nation. Fuck em.
Which is funny, given that the bloggers - left, right, and center - have consistently been breaking more stories with better researched articles of late. The last straggling remnants of print journalism don't have the budget to do more than stenography or the clout to do more than lick the taint of whomever is in charge.
If you treat MAGA Fascism and Biden's Octogenarianism as equally important, so will your audience.
It was extremely late and ineffectual.
Meanwhile, for every Trump scandal story, we got three different Transgender Athlete pieces. North of 30 distinct pieces appeared, often at the front page of the Times coverage. These ran in lockstep with the Republican political campaign ads vilifying liberal candidates for support of Title XI and Equal Access laws.
This, alongside a slew of stories demonizing student protesters which went so far as to call them unwitting agents of the Iranian military.
So, after echoing a slew of lies that echoed Republican talking points in a razor thin election all year long, they also popped off a handful of stories critical of the Republican nominee weeks into the early voting period. Cool. Great job.
Millions of Americans were disenfranchised in 2024.
This was a failure of democracy regardless of outcome. But the dogged assertion that "Americans Voted For This" consistently ignores how many Americans were strictly prohibited from participating, to the point of facing years of jail time, if they even dared submit a provisional ballot.