Good to see people calling out NYT for their nonsense
I'm glad they're doing it. This sane-washing shit drives me crazy. You constantly see headlines saying things like "Trump proposes new policy making guaranteeing sunshine and rainbows for everyone" when in reality, a Trump supporter asked him about lowering food prices and he went in a 15 minute rant that included him saying "and I am the best at sunshine, the sunshine loves me... and don't even get me started at the rainbows... my communist opponent hates rainbows but not me, the rainbows said 'sir, you are the best at sunshine and rainbows, more than anyone has ever seen'."
I don't know if "sane-washing" is the right term. It seems more like they are working as campaign staff to spin a message out of his ramblings.
If they were interested in journalism, they'd say that Trump's plan to lower food prices is to love rainbows and receive love from sunshine. You know, just stating the facts. The term "sane-washing" to me infers that the entity doing the sane-washing is a journalist and not a campaign staffer.
Making incoherent ramblings sound like campaign messages is the exact meaning of “sane-washing”.
Yeah I had a Facebook friend say "This will be unpopular, but I disagree with the two tax breaks being proposed by both candidates."
It had me scratching my head. I've yet to hear Trump propose an actual policy about tax breaks. I heard him ramble about shit and then the media sane-washes it into a policy.
For example, not too long ago Trump said to some CEOs that he'd like to get the corporate tax rate to 20% because it sounded like a "nice, round number". That is an absolutely insane way to set a tax rate.
But the media took it and ran with it and you saw headlines all over the place about Trump's super serious tax policy. Saying "20% sounds nice" isn't a fucking policy!! There was no thought or planning to see the impact of such a rate. Just "yeah that sounds nice". Fuck this guy and people that cover up for his ramblings.
That definition goes with "spinning" the story. However this goes beyond just spinning and it's much more than just whitewashing over a couple imperfections. This is completely rewriting his words and campaigning for the man.
This is taking spinning a story to a new level and "sane-washing" just doesn't convey the weight of their actions. With these actions, the New York Times is more like Trump's A-team campaign management. It's almost like a reverse Dunning-Kruger Effect, where they attempt to make him look like he has ideas and substance when there isn't any.
Good luck... the Times downplayed the holocaust
Wow I can't believe they'd normalize a genocide! Hope that never happens again
True, although it's reasonable to think some things orobably have changed in the last 80 years. Everyone involved in the thing you're talking about has long since died.
It doesn't mean they don't currently suck for other reasons, but because someone(s) working at the same place 80 years ago did something isn't a great one.
NYT played a key role in justifying the Iraq war for liberals. Not a single one of their op-ed writers who spread false propaganda that led to hundreds of thousands of innocent deaths was punished or fired.
I think the issue here isn't that it happened long ago that they've had a chance to change.
The issue is that they have not changed...
Bit late for that tbh
It's still worth doing though.
Absolutely. Damn I’m so happy to see this.
“That they even asked this question is evidence of the bias — the agenda — in their poll. Who made age an ‘issue’? The credulous Times falling into the right-wing’s projection. This is not journalism. Shameful," Jeff Jarvis posted on Threads. He's currently the Leonard Tow Professor of Journalism Innovation at the CUNY Craig Newmark Graduate School of Journalism, Darcy pointed out.
Complaints grew more recently after the Times paraphrased Trump's rambling non-answer while speaking to The Economic Club of New York. In the report, the Times reshaped his language to make sense of what he said. The reality of the comments was that none of it made sense, according to critics.
They were accused of "sane-washing" Trump's comments.
Fascinating and predictable that the Times (or anyone else) hasn’t mentioned it. Linked posts show pictures etc.
Readers left online complaints and cancelled subscriptions before direct protests began. Their demand, according to one civil rights lawyer, is to stop "sane-washing" Trump.
The activists had bright yellow signs with words the Times has avoided using in reports such as "lies," "convict" and "felon." The group had one large black banner across the group reading "stop normalizing Trump."
Fucking beautiful.
Wish I could have joined them. I am disgusted by clickbait media.
NYT has normalized Trump and has continued to spread a significant amount of misinformation and bigotry, including platforming known transphobic bigots. I doubt they'll change anything because you have to "be fair". I'm just glad my mom has stopped supporting them.
"In our efforts to not express what could be conceived as bias, we have decided to bend over backwards to make Trump look as best as we could with the material given."
Any organization doing this out of greed, for the desire to obtain new conservative viewers, are failing at their jobs and don't deserve the protections of the first amendment. It's not there for you to profit off of at our expense, it's there for you to protect and inform us.
Trump released his economic agenda last night in an interview with Fox News. When asked about the policy Trump confirmed the size of his hands and suggested that all of his enemies would regret the day they mocked his crowd sizes. “You just don’t do that, because we’ve got a lot of numbers, so many numbers,” Trump said.
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News