Professional Journalism at the NY Times and CNN

Or maybe not. The Left and the Media, but I repeat myself, love to tell us how accurate the legacy media are. They should be trusted; others should be censored. The legacy media have layers of editorial oversight, they are known for non-biased application of standards, and other stuff. In a pig's eye. Red State brings us all the details.

Last Friday, the "professional journalists" at the NY Times demonstrated their complete lack up understanding of anything to do with geopolitics. Gray Lady Faceplant: NY Times Apparently Doesn't Even Know What NATO Is in Pathetic Gaslighting Effort

The NY Times identified NATO as the North American Treaty Organization. It would be laughable it they weren't trying to lecture all of us about geopolitics and our roll in NATO.

NATO, of course, does not include the word “America” — it’s the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, and it was created in 1947 with Belgium, Canada, Denmark, France, Iceland, Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands, Norway, Portugal, the United Kingdom, and the United States being the founding members.

OK. So they hired a bunch of brain-dead theater kids, who weren't good enough to actually land on Broadway, and decided to go to journalism school, because the math requirements were nil. A simple web search for "NATO" would have turned up the correct info. (It is literally in the 1st line in the Wikipedia article.) But journalists are nothing if not sure of themselves.

“Fact checks? We ain’t got no Fact checks! We don’t need no Fact checks! I don’t have to show you any stinking Fact checks!” (With apologies to The Treasure of the Sierra Madre)

If you can't get the simple facts right, why should I trust you about complex issues? If you are completely unaware of what NATO is, and you would need to be mostly clueless for this error, why should I listen to you when, through your editorial board, you try to tell me what to think about the issues of the day?

So after they made this error they tried to downplay it as simply a typo. It wasn't a simple typo. After That Embarrassing NY Times ‘NATO’ Headline the Press Opposes Applying Their Own Standards

After the typo thing didn't fly they kept at it. It wasn't that big a deal. Or something.

Anytime right-of-center news outlets have an error of this fashion, they become excoriated by those in the press gaggle. Accusations of a lack of editorial oversight and lax journalism are made, while at the same time touting their own fact-checking filters. At the Times, they have long established their own deeply strenuous editing process, declaring how this elevates their quality above all others.

They even explain those layers of oversight.

Somehow, when the most vaunted of news sources screws up to a level well beyond the errors leading to others getting scorched, it is excused away. And this headline debacle was hardly an isolated instance from the Times. Just a week prior, the paper had to issue multiple corrections in its report on recent proposals made by Undersecretary of State Jacon Helberg.

If it weren't for double standards, they'd have no standards at all.

Not to be out done by the NY Times, CNN, “The Most Trusted Name in News,” decided to do a similar face plant. Journalism Fail 101: Major Outlet Reports on Hollywood Star's Death, His Response Is Golden

Now CNN, which still occasionally uses its tagline, “The Most Trusted Name in News,” got in on the game Wednesday with its fond remembrance of the star of the Hollywood blockbuster Back to the Future movies. “Remembering the life of actor Michael J. Fox,” they played across the screen.

One wee bit of a problem here, though.

Michael J. Fox is very much alive.

Fox got into the fray by complaining to Variety. Michael J. Fox Speaks Out After CNN Sparks Death Scare: ‘How Do You React When You Turn on the TV and CNN Is Reporting Your Death?’

“How do you react when you turn on the TV and CNN is reporting your death?” Fox asked his followers. “Do you…A) switch to MNSBC, or whatever they are calling themselves these days, (B) Pour scolding hot water on your lap, if it hurts your fine, (C) Call your wife, hopefully she’s concerned but reassuring, (D) Relax, they do this once every year, (E) Ask yourself wtf ? I thought the world was ending, but apparently it’s just me and I’m ok. Love, Mike.”

Media. You only think you hate them enough.

New York Times and the Term “AWFL”

Leftists have no sense of humor. William Teach at Pirate's Cove brings us a story of media losing its collective mind. NY Times Has Hissy Fit Over Term “AWFL”

The Times stops short of calling it racial slur, but their intent is clear. Stop calling people Affluent, White, Female Liberals. Rarely, a "U" is added for urban, but really it is understood, and besides, not all of them are in urban settings.

Clyde McGrady actually spent 32 paragraphs on this, which reads more like something that would have been in a hardcore lefty site, like Think Progress or The Daily Kos, but, then, most of the people who used to write for those blogs/sites have moved to the Credentialed Media and the younger crowd just goes to work for outlets like the Times these days.

The NY Slimes is so incensed over this term, AWFL, that the underlying article is NOT behind a paywall.

The response on Twitter/X has been amazing as well. Some claim the term is a decade old, but I can't attest to that. I've only run across it in the past few years. But then I'm older than dirt and out of touch with popular culture.

Oh, and as per usual, the NYT has declared it to be a "Far Right" term.

Click thru for more.

The New York Times Doesn't Want to Be Bothered about Facts

All the better to look down their noses. It isn't correct, but don't expect them to admit that. From Professor David Yamane: Getting Past the "Duck Dynasty" Stereotype of Gun Owners

While the NY Slimes is awake to the fact that new gun owners are more diverse than ever, they still have some facts to catch up on.

In an otherwise fascinating and well-reported story on the changing face of gun owners in America today, the authors include a significant misstatement. They write, “a majority of gun owners are white, conservative, male and from rural areas.”

This “Duck Dynasty” stereotype of gun owners is one I have challenged for years now, from my 2019 presentation on Gun Culture 2.0 to my recent opinion essay in The Hill on the unrecognized diversity of gun owners.

You are entitled to your own opinions, but the NYT wants to have its own facts.

Are politically conservative white men from rural areas overrepresented among gun owners relative to their portion of the population? Bullseye!

Are they “a majority of gun owners”? Not by a long shot.

Read the whole thing.

New York Times, Gun Control, and Facts (Or the Lack Thereof)

From Daniel Greenfield at Frontpage Mag we get the following: Media Pushes Gun Control After Trump Assassination [attempt.] He wasn't actually assassinated.

The rifle used by Crooks, who shot and tried to assassinate President Trump, had been bought by his father back in 2013, that means gun control legislation would have done nothing about it even assuming that was a desired outcome, but why should a minor detail like that stop the New York Times.

Congress pushing for "Do something!" gun control in the absence of facts, isn't the case the NY Slimes thinks it is, and bringing up the 2017 shooting at a Republican softball practice in Virginia, without mentioning that the shooter in that case was a Bernie Sanders supporter with a hit list of Republicans he wanted to kill, is a lie of omission. But they're the NY Times. Telling the truth is not in their nature.

Go read the whole thing.

New York Times Covering for Hunter and Joe

Because of course they are. From Red State: SHOCKER: The New York Times Altered Hunter Biden Presser Quote to Cover for Joe Biden

Hunter Biden refused to answer a Congressional subpoena, and instead held a press conference. The Slimes "reported" on said conference.

The Times likely picked up on that, which is why it altered the quote to simply say "business," providing an overly broad (and falsely framed) dismissal of Joe Biden's involvement. The newspaper has since stealth-edited its story (i.e. no correction) to include the word "financially," but it seems exceedingly unlikely the original quote was published by mistake.

There are simply no lengths to which the mainstream media won't go to protect the Bidens. That much is clear.

I can't even be shocked that the media is covering for the Bidens and the Democrats. It is what they do.

NY Times - Fraud Is Less of a Problem when a Woman Does It.

Or something. From The Other McCain: NY Times Publishes Human-Interest Feature About Infamous Fraudster

I wish I could write like this.

You remember Elizabeth Holmes, right? A Stanford University dropout, she raised $700 million in startup capital for a medical testing company, Theranos, and by 2014, when the company’s value had soared to $9 billion, Forbes magazine “recognized Holmes as the world’s youngest self-made female billionaire.” It was all a scam.

But since "more women in STEM" is a thing, the NY Slimes is apparently trying to revitalize her image. Why? I don't have a clue. And I know how few women are in STEM. I had one female mathematics professor in college, for a cryptography class, and after the midterm exam I was the only one still in the class. (Math IS hard, so is life.)

The History of the New York Times Lying to the American Public

From Walter Duranty, and the favorable coverage of the Nazi party during their rise to power, to Holocaust denial, and the more, the NY Times has a long history of ignoring important stories, and as they say in the video, doing WHATEVER it takes to maintain their status as the premere paper, even if that means lying about everything.

Including the Times working to influence public opinion around the Vietnam War.

And can I just say that a "News Organization" trying to influence public opinion means that they are ACTUALLY a propaganda organization.

This is the Clifton Duncan's interview with Ashley Rindsberg. Why You Can't Trust the NY Times. || THE CLIFTON DUNCAN PODCAST 42:. The video is just short of an hour, so plan accordingly.

Layers of Editorial Oversight and Watermelons on the Moon

NYT wins the 2021 Fake News sweepstakes. And I don't see how anyone is going to top this. New York Times publishes story about watermelons found on Mars | Daily Mail Online

The subhead followed: 'Authorities say rise of fruit aliens is to blame for glut of outer space watermelons.'

They quickly changed their minds about the glut of space watermelons.

Futurism reported that the story was live for less than an hour before being removed, though its brief contents were archived before the New York Times could get to it.

A "mock article" never meant to be published. Gee, ya think? It was archived before they could delete it. (The internet never forgets.)

The collected comments from Twitter are hysterical. Click Thru.