Althouse: If I didn't maintain rudimentary trust in the basic integrity of The New York Times...

September 6, 2018

If I didn't maintain rudimentary trust in the basic integrity of The New York Times...

... I would think that there is no real person behind the famous anonymous op-ed. I'd think it was a concocted composite based on the Woodward book and motivated by the Woodward book. Look how that little thrown together collection of paragraphs is now drawing more attention than the book Woodward labored over, which dominated headlines on Tuesday. Wednesday, this column comes out. What is in the column that couldn't have been extracted from the book and worked up into an op-ed purporting to be from a senior official in the White House?

That's just a conspiracy theory. I couldn't help thinking it, but I don't believe it's true, because I think the NYT has too much of a stake in at least the appearance of journalistic integrity. I do think that the real senior official who wrote the op-ed felt stimulated by the Woodward book, maybe thinks it's a good idea to add momentum to the various stop-Trump efforts, and is perhaps close to resigning and hoping to depart into the open arms of the Trump-hating elite.

215 comments:

«Oldest ‹Older 201 – 215 of 215

C R Krieger said...: Clyde, at 8:19, nails it:

"Walter Duranty smiles."

Regards — Cliff; 9/6/18, 6:10 PM
Arashi said...: There is always the BBC. They have their own bias, but are far better at presenting actual news from around the globe than any US media giant.; 9/6/18, 6:11 PM
Churchy LaFemme: said...: Apart from their bias (which can be astounding), the BBC can be clueless about US issues. Limving in a unitary state (well, less so now..), they never seem to quite "get" federalism. Also, they often don't seem to get that legislatable issues are different from constitutional issues.

The Daily Mail, for all its flaws seems to do some good US coverage.; 9/6/18, 7:00 PM
Elliott A said...: If there is a group of people acting in concert, then we need a special prosecutor to root them out and lock them in prison and throw away the key. They are in fact spies, using false pretense to place themselves in a position to stymie the president. This is sedition if they are acting on international relations policy or military policy. There is no free speech protection when the acts involve action not words.; 9/6/18, 7:17 PM
Guildofcannonballs said...: "Trump'll just mean-tweet about it."

Yeah he won't be holding a rally in front of thousands of people again, tonight, in Montana. (although if he did it will start live-streaming on youtube at 7 pm MST)

No he will just mean-tweet I am sure.; 9/6/18, 7:34 PM
bagoh20 said...: Like God, if this "senior level person" didn't exist, someone would make him up anyway.

After living through all the fake media assertions of the last two years, there is now no reason more to believe this person exists than to not believe it. There is plenty of motivation to make him up - unhinged, unprincipled motivation.; 9/6/18, 7:53 PM
Michael K said...: That’s commentary. I want news reporting.

And you think you get it from the NY Times ?

You would do better with the Daily Mirror.; 9/6/18, 8:00 PM
cronus titan said...: It is unlikely that the op-ed write does not exist, but it is possible. The NYT is on record saying that they viewed their journalist role as "oppositional" in light of their objections to Trump.

https://www.nytimes.com/2016/08/08/business/balance-fairness-and-a-proudly-provocative-presidential-candidate.html?_r=0

That was in August 2016, about 3 months BEFORE the election. The NYT has grown even more histrionic since then. It's really not all that great a leap for them to make up a source.

More likely, their "senior administration official" is no such thing. They do have a history of characterizing the seniority of officials depending on what narrative they want to push. In one instance, the NYT ran a lengthy anti-fracking article and claimed they even had the emails from a “senior official” Because the emails were from a government organization, investigators were able to track down the sender a friggin' intern. When their public editor questioned the integrity of misrepresenting the seniority of the official they fired the public editor and disestablished position. There is history on this point.

https://townhall.com/columnists/phelimmcaleer/2018/09/06/relax-president-trump-new-york-times-has-history-of-exaggerating-seniority-of-anonymous-officials-n2516340

Hiring Sarah Jeong shows they really do not give a shit about professionalism anymore.; 9/6/18, 8:02 PM
Dear corrupt left, go F yourselves said...: I heard it read aloud and the only person I could think of was John McCain and his "steady state". John McCain is mentioned but I think that is the perfect way for JOhn McCain to throw everyone off.; 9/6/18, 8:14 PM
Quaestor said...: I want news reporting.

Anonymous sources cited by the New York Times is commentary.; 9/6/18, 8:43 PM
Ken Mitchell said...: Ann, the Failing New York Times gave up ANY pretense to integrity decades ago, and I can EASILY believe that the editorial staff wrote the "Trump resistance" editorial.; 9/6/18, 9:08 PM
n.n said...: NYT is report+spin. So are all press outfits. The goal is to judge the reporting and remove the spin. This is accomplished through diversity (i.e. sources), which includes reporting and spin that includes your own observation and discernment.; 9/6/18, 9:20 PM
n.n said...: Hiring Sarah Jeong shows they really do not give a shit about professionalism anymore.

NYT is rabidly diverse and their color judgments affect the quality of their reporting and spin. This layer of bias, nay prejudice, needs to be removed through diversity (i.e. independent sources/signals).

Ha! This reminds of the confusion engendered through conflation of sex and gender, and information (and lives) lost in the fetus, offspring, baby abstractions.; 9/6/18, 9:28 PM
Darrell Harris said...: I believe it was Ann that recommended The Daily, which is the NYT news podcast hosted by Michael Barbaro. Anyway, I listened to this morning's entry, which was an interview Barbaro had with the editor of the NYT Op-Ed section. No clues as to the identity of the writer, but an interesting insight into the process that got the editorial in the paper. Highly recommended.; 9/6/18, 10:33 PM
Unknown said...: Althouse, thanks for the response. I still don’t see how you can trust the NYT as a source for news reporting given their hire of an outright racist recently and defending her anti-white, anti-male screeds with some sophist arguments. Ditto with hiring and keeping a reporter who got her stories by sleeping with at least one of her sources.

Not to mention Blair and others. Integrity and NYTdont belong in the same sentence unless “lack of” is also in it.; 9/6/18, 11:00 PM