Read this story in today’s NYT before saying it has jumped the shark:
3 Likes
Facebook users are much like a battered woman who shows up bruised every weekend, but won’t leave her abuser. People should NEVER trust FB or Zuck or any other corporate entity that’s making billions off of selling private info. If you care about this, delete your FB account and encourage friends and family to delete theirs.
What FB is doing is bad, but not nearly as bad as being without a FB page. Something like that, right?
2 Likes
Liked x millions and millions of times.
3 Likes
Unless the editing was done purely for reasons of copy-fitting for a given amount of space, there’s no obvious reason for the change in the first place, unless Sandberg was in fact NOT consternated by Stamos’s views. Looks to me like the NYT went out of its way to soften the portrayal of Sandberg as resistant to investigating the Russian angle. The question is why, and with Dean Baquet at the helm, I will never give the NYT the benefit of the doubt.
3 Likes
And if Zuck is running for President in 2020, all this negatory attention has got to be spinning the FB Exec Team into a serious frenzy, hence the iconoclast Stamos is out…
1 Like
I noticed that they had Kenneth Vogel critiquing the news about Cambridge Analytica and claiming that they didn’t really deliver any good results for the campaigns they were hired by. Kenneth P; Vogel who joined the GOP driven Politico before it was even formed. What a shill for the GOP.
1 Like
Why? Simple: ad revenue. Facebook has far more power in the relationship than the NYT’s.
1 Like
How does that affect their relationship? In other words - just because FB has more ad revenue, how would they be able to harm the NYT with it?
Its not the amount of revenue Facebook has. Its the amount of traffic they send to outlets like the NYT’s. Think of the thousands(millions) of hits a NYT story gets just because it is showing up in Facebook. If Facebook got tough with the times they could put a huge dent in the traffic.
Check this article out when you have time: https://techcrunch.com/2018/02/03/facebooks-siren-call/
Facebook wields far too much power.
5 Likes
He’s out west.
“Out west, where you vacation, the aspens will already be turning. They turn in clusters, because their roots connect them.”
4 Likes
Thanks - that does explain it. I’m not on FB anymore and was barely on it at all, so it didn’t occur to me that they had that affect for the NYT.
1 Like
Wasn’t the WaPost responsible for the initial “reporting” on the Clinton Foundation “scandal”?
1 Like
Bravo Epi. My thoughts exactly. Even down to the word ‘nothingburger’
1 Like
This is not the first time the NY Times caused major harm by marching right so as to avoid being criticized for being left. Does anyone else remember the Iraq War?
What gets me about newspapers catering to the Right and insulting the Left, most “Right wingers” will never read the NY times whereas those the NY Times is being bias against is its reader base. Any wonder the NY Times is failing?
2 Likes
Their political coverage has jumped the shark, sadly. As has the op-ed page.
And when errors are pointed out, the reaction of their political reporters is always and ever to dig in their heels, and insist they did nothing wrong, and that’s the reaction of Dean Bacquet, as well.
Unlike, say, in the aftermath of the invasion of Iraq, when the Times actually did acknowledge the problems in its coverage of the run-up.
5 Likes
I am still waiting for the NY Times to answer for their helping Bush lie America into the disastrous Iraq War.
One of the big reasons America is where it is and Trump is president is that the American news media has failed so miserably in its duty to inform Americans is that nobody knows what is the truth. The first article I remember reading by Paul Krugman had nothing to do with economics but rather in the run-up why Europeans overwhelmingly opposed and Americans overwhelmingly supported Bush. The reasons for the differences as Krugman demonstrated was the differences in the coverage with the European media taking seriously those of us who opposed the war because the war would either end in disaster (as it did) or the cost would be so prohibitive, (high taxes to support a Marshall Plan for Iraq to convince the people to accept a unified democracy instead of other choices combined with a DRAFT to have the required troop levels secure the borders to keep out undesirables as well as provide everyday security to everyday Iraqis so they could build the institutions necessary for a western style democracy) that America would be weaker, poorer and worse off regardless of the condition of Iraq.
What the NY Times tilting coverage to appease false criticism “liberal” bias has accomplished is to destroy the NY Times reputation and that of most other news sources well at the same time making itself a punching bag for the right and hurting those of us who believe in or have factual bias. Or to put another way, well Trump and the far Right attack the NY Times as being a “failing newspaper”, I cannot wait for the NY Times to die so I can piss on its grave.
1 Like
The NYT should have issued a statement when they changed the language…full stop. I’m sorry but the NYT depends on the FB platform for revenue so FB strong arming the NYT is way more believable. FB execs are obsessed with their reputations to it makes sense.
2 Likes
Please don’t insult sea otters. They are cute, furry, and have no use for social net works…
Probably will cause only a minor blip in one of their off shore accounts
1 Like
Google: Don’t be evil (but collect every keystroke of every user and sell it to anyone who’s willing to pay).
None of these companies are angels.
3 Likes