no way NYT

(to be clear i fully agree with you that there should not be such a thing as a regular NYT opinion columnist, and that nobody's 20th best opinion of the year is worth a damn)

jamelle bouie is grebt, and i suspect that as black man extremely well-versed in the last 300+ years of american history, he has almost endless things to write about twice a week

i have no idea what pamela paul will offer us on a weekly basis? ideally it won't be about the tragedy of taking her stupid friends to a sandwich place that offers soppressata, but i guess we'll see

This disconnect is vexing. Ilxorz and lefties in general believe the NYT is center-right at best, and not to be trusted. Most of the conservasphere believes the NYT is hard left, left of Che Guevara, left of Lenin, left of Bernie, and not to be trusted.

Can both of these descriptions be true? I dunno. In the meantime I still feel like the NYT has a pretty good crossword puzzle app so I feel like sticking with it.

trust fund kids have their own class politics. they resent the bourgeoisie (their parents) and feel guilty that they are part of it. so there is an incentive to evade directly dealing with uncomfortable questions of class. this accounts for the dissonance i think.

Not sure I understand how that is supposed to square the circle but OK I guess.

My final question is the extent to which the New York Times is actually influencing anything or anyone. That is, how many minds are getting changed because people type things and the NYT prints them or "prints" them?

I am skeptical. I don't think there are very many people being swayed to or from their preexisting attitudes because of something appearing in legacy print media. Maybe I'm wrong about this. As noted, I have been in the bubble since birth (child of journalists, journalism major, former journalist, etc.). But I have cultivated a humility about the influence of the field because I have been awake for the last quarter-century and see that it's only a tiny minority of weirdos who read anything any more, let alone something so dinosaurian as a printed newspaper.

Me? I have been read the Washington Post and New York Times all my life, but (a) I know I am an outlier and (b) Doing so hasn't put very many ideas in my head that weren't already there.

People who read, like, and believe newspapers do so because newspapers reflect a worldview they already hold, and which they probably inherited from their parents.

People who ignore, hate, and disparage newspapers do so because that course of actions reflects a worldview they already hold, and which they probably inherited from their parents.

What are you going on about?

so has the NYT always been center right? or did it execute a turnabout a few years ago? surely it was seen as much worse than center-right by the counter culture left in the late 1960s…

one difference from 10 years ago is that is not teetering on the edge of financial collapse: it is now a totemic product that the members of bourgie center left (such as me) use to signal their allegiance, their class, etc etc…and is calling it "center right" as a pejorative an ILX thing or is it widespread throughout the left internet?

so has the NYT always been center right? or did it execute a turnabout a few years ago? surely it was seen as much worse than center-right by the counter culture left in the late 1960s…

I'm pretty sure the Times came in for a kicking in Chomsky and Herman's Manufacturing Consent, which I read 30 years ago. And it definitely features prominently in Eric Alterman's What Liberal Media?, which came out in 2003. Calling it a "liberal" paper basically amounts to the broader public adopting a Nixon-era attack line.

Oh, it's just a viral marketing campaign

https://twitter.com/KimStimFilms/status/1625183907833430033

Shocking but this Yale prof says the quite part out loud suggesting mass suicide for old folks in Japan! This is the premise of Chie Hayakawa's moving, & unforgettable PLAN 75- a Cannes winner is set in a chilling, sci-fi tinged near future. Opens Spring!https://t.co/022TIc8heF

— KimStim (@KimStimFilms) February 13, 2023

The glasses are bothering me tbh

Yeah sorry, you can’t Gramsci your way out of this one, treeship— by any objective measure, the Times has been a center-right paper for my entire life, at least, and I am nearing 40. unperson otm.

In Defense of J.K. Rowling

surprised it took her this long tbh

God, Pamela Paul really is the worst.

abysmal

Can't believe I bothered to read it but my summary is:

*Here's all the things trans people are angry at J.K. about, but see they're actually nbd because

*Here's three cherry picked quotes that make Rowling appear to be pro-trans, when considered out of topic

*Also here's one journalist who used to think she was transphobic and now doesn't

*Also she got death threats!!!

*Ergo she is not transphobic

yes, why would I not “take it” from this obviously very sane and trustworthy source pic.twitter.com/HbiDdrmC0S

— Jesse Fuchs (@jessefuchs) February 16, 2023

thanks Alfred.

I read more of EJ Rosetta's tweets and uhh anybody who thinks she went into her assignment ready to assassinate Rowling and was 'stunned by the lack of evidence' and changed her mind is a humongous dumb fuck.

lol Marc Joseph Stern called her out on it back then

This is not how either language or logic works

— Mark Joseph Stern (@mjs_DC) January 29, 2023

no one tell the Cistercian nuns about this

Also that writer considers “dyke” a slur, which is some…truly weird shit?!!

Like, the biggest lesbian event in the US is the SF Dyke March. Who does she think she’s fooling?

she called a guy who was 'mean' to her a pedophile because of his beard so

maybe she's Elon Musk's alt

love the fact that she took 12 weeks to do research for a listicle

An open letter from NYT contributors about the paper's embrace of transphobia: https://nytletter.com/. (As Slate pointed out this was published yesterday, and then the PP/JK thing came out today...)

Definitely worth reading the whole thing, but this stood out in light of the very confused posts about bias & influence upthread:

The natural destination of poor editorial judgment is the court of law. Last year, Arkansas’ attorney general filed an amicus brief in defense of Alabama’s Vulnerable Child Compassion and Protection Act, which would make it a felony, punishable by up to 10 years’ imprisonment, for any medical provider to administer certain gender⁠-⁠affirming medical care to a minor (including puberty blockers) that diverges from their sex assigned at birth. The brief cited three different New York Times articles to justify its support of the law: Bazelon’s “The Battle Over Gender Therapy,” Azeen Ghorayshi’s “Doctors Debate Whether Trans Teens Need Therapy Before Hormones,” and Ross Douthat’s “How to Make Sense of the New L.G.B.T.Q. Culture War.” As recently as February 8th, 2023, attorney David Begley’s invited testimony to the Nebraska state legislature in support of a similar bill approvingly cited the Times’ reporting and relied on its reputation as the “paper of record” to justify criminalizing gender⁠-⁠affirming care.

I signed that— has thousands of signatures

ej rosetta is such a blatant grifter to the point that even some of the other transphobes have caught on (there's a lot of drama with her begging for paypal donations 'to protect lesbians' etc. and starting inscrutable beefs with other transphobes). it's almost certain there was no listicle assignment to begin with, let alone that she had three months to do it or that she was pro-trans before it

And then today, McWhorter’s newsletter defends Desantis. I often wonder whether the former is aware that all of the people whose boots he’s licking would like to see him dead, or whether he’s somehow convinced himself that he’s “one of the good ones.”

Having just read the column, he could've offered his non-controversial views without framing it around goddamn DeSantis, who will share the thing and go, "See?"

As someone who has read several of his essays and even one of his books, it pains me to conclude that John McWhorter may not be very bright.

For all I know, he is a brilliant linguist (I haven't seen any criticism of his work in that area), it's his forays into social/political punditry that don't reflect well on him.

His view on dying languages is appaling to me, especially in the Canadian context of FNIM trying to reclaim their cultural heritage, so even as a linguist he can be frustrating.

I think he’s smart enough to know how many sales you guarantee by titling your book Woke Racism.

He’s not a good linguist either.

He isn't that bad a linguist, really. Or at least he didn't use to be 20 years ago. His The Power of Babel is one of the books that first got me into the subject, and I think it's still a good introduction. Also his Great Courses on the history of the English language is solid. He has been such a massive disappointment over the last decade though.

American Teens Are Really Miserable. Why?

—Ross Douthat

Q: American Teens Are Really Miserable. Why?
A: Ross Douthat

I occasionally write comments on NYT op-eds because I can’t resist, this Douthat column made me write this:

“In a culture where most people have to work constantly (occasionally at multiple jobs) in order to afford basic necessities while one political ideology doubles down on fascism and the other doubles down on neoliberalism and hollow politics of representation, it’s no wonder that young people are depressed. There are no opportunities except meaningless drudgery available to many, and those jobs that might have some meaning are not well-remunerated. Add climate destabilization, attacks on women, racism, attacks on LGBTQ people, and a nihilistic political culture that operates at the whims of the wealthy and corporations? The question becomes: how are young people NOT depressed, living in this world that Reagan and each president following him have built.”

Ross Asshat.

You know who's more miserable than teens? Boomers. Whine, whine, whine on Facebook. whine, whine, whine with their Don't Tread On Me flags and their Republican voting patterns.

Unsubscribed today. For months I'd only been reading the Arts, Books, and Magazine sections (the latter every time David Marchese interviewed somebody, and that's about it) and I finally decided I don't even need that. With the Atlantic toughening its paywall significantly (opening articles in an incognito browser window doesn't work anymore), I'm gonna be fresh out of empty-headed bullshit soon!

Joyce Carol Oates coming out of the audience with a hatchet in each hand:

no one wants to acknowledge that perhaps teenagers spend so much time on their cell phones because the conversations of their elders, including mansplainers like Ross Douthat, are exhausting, boring, & unrewarding to them. https://t.co/3GAUeZUzwm

— Joyce Carol Oates (@JoyceCarolOates) February 19, 2023

https://www.nytimes.com/2023/02/19/realestate/metaverse-vr-housing-market.html

People who read, like, and believe newspapers do so because newspapers reflect a worldview they already hold, and which they probably inherited from their parents.

People who ignore, hate, and disparage newspapers do so because that course of actions reflects a worldview they already hold, and which they probably inherited from their parents.

― Auf Der Martini (Ye Mad Puffin), Monday, February 13, 2023 5:52 AM (one week ago)

this is pretty otm ... I feel like the issue is less about actual influence and more about symbolic representation and whose already existing worldview it is representing ...

_People who read, like, and believe newspapers do so because newspapers reflect a worldview they already hold, and which they probably inherited from their parents.

People who ignore, hate, and disparage newspapers do so because that course of actions reflects a worldview they already hold, and which they probably inherited from their parents.

― Auf Der Martini (Ye Mad Puffin), Monday, February 13, 2023 5:52 AM (one week ago)_

this is pretty otm ... I feel like the issue is less about actual influence and more about symbolic representation and whose already existing worldview it is representing ...

unless there's some kind of empirical evidence that YMP's binary generalization is true, there's no reason to consider yourself an outlier. my parents don't read the NYT

Okay. I have no illusions that I know how the world works. Further, I've been pretty open about how much of my life I've spent ensconced in the operations of legacy print media (not at the NYT but close enough). It's probably more than most people.

At the same time, I have cultivated a carapace of jadedness about its influence (from one perspective). From another perspective I have cultivated a kind of zen humility about its influence, and from still a third perspective a deep skepticism about its influence. To my mind, people are going to do the stuff they are going to do. The arrival of a specific wafer of wood pulp on their doorstep is neither making nor breaking their received opinions. There are larger forces at work, I suspect, in e.g. the parents of table or of rob.

But yeah sure let's excoriate the newspaper, cool cool, a nearly moribund cultural artifact. If it vanished tomorrow (which it very well could), the political attitudes you hate would still exist and flourish.

T - you're an outlier and i <3 you for it

but I think the thing is in terms of political views, I think YMP is correct, the newspaper is going to reinforce the views you already have. There are people who will "engage with content" in an oppositional way ... like, just because you read something regularly doesn't mean you agree with it. ... especially if it's free.

(on the editor's part)

It's more that it's archaic, in the sense of "room to maneuver a ship around to avoid hitting rocks" but very No Way NYT nonetheless

No you see "a wide berth" is the population problem that Swift attempted to solve in A Modest Proposal

pun that I had missed

"a wide berth" means to avoid entirely iirc, I think she meant to say "give them some leeway"

we have not given this article a wide berth

https://en.wiktionary.org/wiki/wide_berth

I recently had to explain this term to a non-English speaker, but really, NYT?

To be fair I agree most satirists should be given a wide berth.

Bill Maher in particular

not interested in any meaning of wide berth that isn't about that wagon

a wide berth isn't something you're given, it's something you earn