#NYT

NY Times plunges new lows – if that was possible

What a disgrace. NY Times journalist Murray Carpenter and photographer Tristan Spinsky want to run a story which publicizes Fox presenter Tucker Carlson’s home address to get him off the air. Imagine if Tucker Carlson reported where NY Times editors and journalists lived? We would never hear the end of it.

No matter how abhorrent NYT might find Carlson’s politics to be, his family should be totally off-limits. We thought that Bari Weiss’ resignation letter was the peak of the disgraceful antics at the NYT.

This is criminal, sinister and a perfect example of how reprehensible the one reputable paper has become. Instead of crushing Carlson’s arguments with facts and logic, they want to cancel him. Tells us all we need to know.

Can the NYT or WaPo top this for nauseating adoration of a failed leader?

It is hard to believe that anything could top the gut-wrenching nausea of this opinion piece in The Age. NYT or WaPo might blush.

Dan Andrews, for our foreign readers, is the deeply left-leaning Premier of Victoria who is facing criticism over deploying poorly trained private security guards who slept with guests staying in hotels during lockdown and contracted coronavirus. The Age is a left-leaning mainstream newspaper in Australia.

Warning: Keep a bucket by your side when you read it.

Who knew? NYT opinion editor quits citing lack of integrity at the paper

NYT

NY Times opinion editor Bari Weiss has quit the paper effectively saying that the newspaper has lost any ability to seek balance post Trump’s 2016 election win. We post an excerpt of the resignation letter she wrote to her boss,

But the lessons that ought to have followed the election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else...

...Twitter is not on the masthead of The New York Times. But Twitter has become its ultimate editor. As the ethics and mores of that platform have become those of the paper, the paper itself has increasingly become a kind of performance space. Stories are chosen and told in a way to satisfy the narrowest of audiences, rather than to allow a curious public to read about the world and then draw their own conclusions. I was always taught that journalists were charged with writing the first rough draft of history. Now, history itself is one more ephemeral thing molded to fit the needs of a predetermined narrative.

…There are terms for all of this: unlawful discrimination, hostile work environment, and constructive discharge. I’m no legal expert. But I know that this is wrong.

..some coworkers insist I need to be rooted out if this company is to be a truly “inclusive” one, while others post ax emojis next to my name. Still other New York Times employees publicly smear me as a liar and a bigot on Twitter with no fear that harassing me will be met with appropriate action. They never are

I do not understand how you have allowed this kind of behavior to go on inside your company in full view of the paper’s entire staff and the public. And I certainly can’t square how you and other Times leaders have stood by while simultaneously praising me in private for my courage. Showing up for work as a centrist at an American newspaper should not require bravery…

…Part of me wishes I could say that my experience was unique. But the truth is that intellectual curiosity—let alone risk-taking—is now a liability at The Times. Why edit something challenging to our readers, or write something bold only to go through the numbing process of making it ideologically kosher, when we can assure ourselves of job security (and clicks) by publishing our 4000th op-ed arguing that Donald Trump is a unique danger to the country and the world? And so self-censorship has become the norm.

What rules that remain at The Times are applied with extreme selectivity. If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and their work remain unscrutinized. Everyone else lives in fear of the digital Thunderdome. Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets.

Who knew? So much for all the news that is fit to print.

The truth hurts

What a tangled web we weave when first we practise to deceive!

How ironic that the papers that practice social justice the hardest have the most troubled pasts.

The Guardian was founded by a slave owner. The NY Times founding editor wrote an editorial which supported the right of slave owners to recover escaped slaves according to Prager University.

#CancelNYT ?

WaPo admits bounty on US soldiers evidence sketchy and needed confirmation but ran with it anyway

Opinion | This is how democracy dies — in full view of a public ...

The mainstream media has been foaming at the mouth hoping that Trump knew about intelligence that said that Russians were paying bounties to insurgents in Afghanistan for killing US and coalition troops. Social media ran with a #TRE45ON hashtag. They so wanted it to be true. Anything to prevent his reelection. Smear, slime, lie.

It turns out that WaPo has been forced to admit that the information was deemed sketchy and in need of additional confirmation. But hey, let’s run with it anyway!

The NY Times was equally complicit. It was running stories of slain soldiers in Afghanistan in an attempt to smear the president. These journalists have absolutely no morals or ethics. Use dead soldiers to push uncorroborated evidence to feed a narrative.

Shameless. WaPo’s “Democracy dies in darkness” and The NY Times “All the news that fit to print” mottos are perhaps the most inaccurate descriptors imaginable.

As we like to say, journalistic integrity will only return when the mainstream media loves America more than they hate Trump.

More double standards in the mainstream media

Two things from last week which carry on with the theme of double standards within the mainstream media. These are so unbelievable that one could be confused to think it was satire coming from the Babylon Bee.

First MSNBC has hired Lisa Page, the lover of former FBI special agent Peter Strzok as a legal analyst. Recall their SMS conversations…no bias there…

FBI report: Anti-Trump texts 'cast a cloud' over email probe

Then The New York Times, despite an invitation, couldn’t publish an opinion piece by Senator Tom Cotton which suggested military support to support law enforcement was sensible because apparently, “Running this puts Black people, including Black @nytimes staff, in danger.”

Apparently, the words of a sitting US senator were deemed more offensive, divisive and dangerous than other NYT opinion pieces from Putin, Erdogan and the Taliban they were only too pleased to publish.

Sen. Cotton said in response, “My Op-Ed doesn’t meet the New York Times’ standards…It far exceeds their standards, which are normally full of left-wing, sophomoric drivel…in the face of the woke mob of woke kids that are in their newsroom.

Never mind the MorningConsult poll which revealed 58% of voters, including a 48% plurality of Democrats who said they’d support bringing in U.S. troops to supplement city police forces amid the protests.

All the news that is fit to print? If the left didn’t have double standards, they wouldn’t have any.

Why are 28,000 US COVID19 deaths overreported?

We are curious as to why the US Government’s official Centre for Disease Control & Prevention (CDC) records only 37,308 COVID19 deaths as of April 25th-end when Johns Hopkins University (JHU) reports over 65,000…that is a c.75% difference.

CDC explained its methodology as follows,

The provisional counts for coronavirus disease (COVID-19) deaths are based on a current flow of mortality data in the National Vital Statistics System (NVSS). National provisional counts include deaths occurring within the 50 states and the District of Columbia that have been received and coded as of the date specified. It is important to note that it can take several weeks for death records to be submitted to National Center for Health Statistics (NCHS), processed, coded, and tabulated.

In short, the data recorded is that of the official cause of death plugged into the national database.

JHU reports its data gathering as follows:

Johns Hopkins experts are aggregating data from multiple credible sources to track the spread of COVID-19…

…The tracking map’s data powers a number of external research and visualization efforts by prominent media organizations such as CNN, The New York Times, The Guardian, and the Associated Press [all media organizations with an axe to grind]. But its data is also used by smaller organizations, such as Blauer’s data team at the Centers for Civic Impact (CCI).”

Interestingly, the CCI, which was newly instituted at JHU, tried to explain the discrepancy.

Obtaining accurate and timely data about the spread of the virus has become an unexpected challenge in the United States. While the federal government has traditionally been the most authoritative source for national public health data, this has proved not to be the case with the coronavirus pandemic. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the nation’s official source for public health surveillance data, has not kept its site updated with information available through state and local health departments. 

Even if we accept that the official CDC data is delayed by up to two weeks, we are surprised the figures are out by a factor of 28,000 deaths or almost 75%. Will the data JHU gleans from state and local health departments differ to those eventually supplied to the NCHS for publishing by the CDC?

Perhaps we should be a little suspicious of CCI’s noble quest for data when it published a piece which expressed the following statement:

Aggregating information from dozens of sources is challenging and time-consuming, so volunteer projects have stepped in to fill the gap. One major backbone of this effort has been the COVID Tracking Project. Started by two journalists from The Atlantic and a data scientist from Related Sciences, the COVID Tracking Project scrapes data directly from state public health websites so that its numbers are constantly current.”

Volunteers? Journalists from The Atlantic, an unhinged left-leaning newspaper which makes Pravda look like the Volkischer Beobachter? Why is a reputable university relying on such sources? Who validates and peer reviews that data to ensure accuracy? Are the volunteers activists? All valid questions.

To be honest, as a data driven group, FNF Media does not see data collection across 50 states as that time consuming. Much of it is in CSV format making it easy to download.

At the conclusion of the pandemic the numbers should show little variance. We watch with interest to see the final audit. Perhaps we can start with JHU’s current 65,000 number and wait another 2 weeks for CDC to publish the official figures and see just how (in)accurate the numbers are.

No wonder the media has a field day on the data which paints a scarier picture. They might source JHU but not disclose the volunteers that compile it.

It’s just hard to reconcile how a university which has $6 billion in annual revenues can’t divert resources to conduct the research in house?!

Now media has an issue with Trump’s $3,100 stake in Sanofi

The story just keeps getting more deranged. Now The NY Times is taking umbrage at the fact that Trump’s family has a $110k stake in a Dodge & Cox global mutual fund that just happens to have Sanofi, the maker of Plaquenil (hydroxychloroquine sulfate), as its largest holding. A whopping 2.9%! Which means his family stake would be c.$3,100.

One imagines if that same fund owned stakes in GM or Boeing that he should be accused of skimming off the top because he is ferried in The Beast and flown around in Air Force One. FedEx is in there too. Better keep an eye on Melania and Ivanka’s outgoing courier mail to ensure that UPS is also getting a fair share.

For the benefit of The NY Times, it might help to know that Trump has no legal control over the asset allocation choices made by a global mutual fund other than choosing to buy or sell it. Furthermore, Sanofi has been a dud stock over the last 5 years in terms of performance.

It would be better had the NYT taken pot-shots at Trump’s dreadful choice in asset manager given Sanofi has been such a dog.

Perhaps it would be nicer to think that the drug actually works. Certainly seems more promising than anything else out there to date.

Sad to think that The NY Times would seemingly prefer the drug fails and people die than Trump get a windfall profit in his 401k.

DNC Chair orders a recount in Iowa

Tom Perez (right) was endorsed by Joe Biden for the role of DNC Chair in Feb 2017 after the debacle that ended up being the 2016 election under Debbie Wasserman Schultz. Perez won, beating out pro-Sanders Keith Ellison.

As we know, Bernie Sanders is neck and neck with Pete Buttigieg in the Iowa Caucus. However, Perez tweeted overnight,

Enough is enough. In light of the problems that have emerged in the implementation of the delegate selection plan and in order to assure public confidence in the results, I am calling on the Iowa Democratic Party to immediately begin a recanvass.

The NY Times commented that,

In some cases, vote tallies do not add up. In others, precincts are shown allotting the wrong number of delegates to certain candidates. And in at least a few cases, the Iowa Democratic Party’s reported results do not match those reported by the precincts.

Hopefully, any recount will result in the one that is palatable to the DNC.