So it says here* that the New York Times put Dershowitz bitching about not being invited to cocktail parties on Martha’s Vineyard on the front page.** Because clearly in these times there are no other stories more worthy of A1 than some old rich guy who whores out a once deserved reputation for money complaining about other rich guy’s cocktail parties. Way to keep on top of what really matters, New York Times!
*Not linking direct because for things like this the NYT doesn’t deserve the clicks.
**Except now he says that he’s being invited to even more parties, because everyone secretly agrees with him but won’t say so in public. Also his Canadian girlfriend is visiting for the 4th, but no you can’t meet her because they’ll be way too busy.
Never let mere facts get in the way of confirming your expectations. Consarn kids today!
… and while the Republic burns, the NYT devotes yet even more space to the burning question of who gets invited to rich peoples’ cocktail parties:
(This is a different article from the previous one! Because the NYT can’t think of anything more important to cover …)
They’re just following ord-… Just doing their jobs.
Last week, at a New York Times event at UCLA, the dean of the university’s Luskin School of Public Affairs jarred several Times reporters on the panel when he took them to task during his introduction for the event ― chiding them for their reporting on the 2016 election and for the paper’s “both sides” journalism amid the current “civility” debate.
Professor Gary Segura first lauded the journalists ― Los Angeles bureau chief Adam Nagourney, national political reporters Maggie Haberman and Alex Burns and polling analyst Nate Cohn ― as “some of the finest reporters in the United States.” He noted that the Times has, since the election, “fundamentally changed journalism,” breaking stories daily “in the face of great adversity.” Then he weighed in with his criticism:
It would be great to celebrate them. But I want to make sure that tonight’s event also holds The New York Times accountable.
The New York Times has played a role in our current debate, maybe one that they’re not necessarily comfortable with. In April of 2016 one of our guests, Maggie Haberman, said, “Will Trump actually be good for the gays?” Guess what? I don’t actually speak for all gays and lesbians. But no.
[…]
As Sullivan describes, the influence of the Times in setting a narrative is profound. In story after story that followed Haberman’s, from The Washington Post to ABC News, Trump was described as supporting LGBTQ rights based on oblique and superficial statements he made at larger public forums ― and by referencing Haberman’s piece ― while omitting his very clear anti-LGBTQ promises to evangelical leaders. (I wrote column after column criticizing the media for this, to no avail.)
Not sure where to put this. This is a guy is running for governor here. It’s in heavy rotation.
I have to wonder if the voice over guy on the commercial is a supporter. At the 2 second mark, he probably could have enunciated differently to not elicit snickers.
LOL. I’ll correct it.
I know. He’s a jagofficer. :D
You just know that Trump demanded to hold the baby in the very first take. But after grabbing it by the neck and left foot, DeSantis’ wife forced her husband to hold it instead.
“Analysis.”
Indeed.
Trump is very likely to declare his meeting with the Russian leader a win.
“Very likely”? Really?
I expect some nothing deal about partnership in Syria or something, where it has no measurable impact on literally anything.
I expect Russia to de-nuke.
At least it doesn’t say BREAKING NEWS: OUTRAGE
INB4 they invite on a Trump sycophant who is probably a white supremacist.