|
|
Post by librarylady on Nov 3, 2024 16:11:10 GMT
for DT.
Here it is in full, with its original links to other Times coverage of Trump preserved: “You already know Donald Trump. He is unfit to lead. Watch him. Listen to those who know him best. He tried to subvert an election and remains a threat to democracy. He helped overturn Roe, with terrible consequences. Mr. Trump’s corruption and lawlessness go beyond elections: It’s his whole ethos. He lies without limit. If he’s re-elected, the G.O.P. won’t restrain him. Mr. Trump will use the government to go after opponents. He will pursue a cruel policy of mass deportations. He will wreak havoc on the poor, the middle class and employers. Another Trump term will damage the climate, shatter alliances and strengthen autocrats. Americans should demand better. Vote.”
Last week, the Times’ editorial board published a longer, only slightly less scathing article urging voters not to elect Trump.
|
|
|
|
Post by Merge on Nov 3, 2024 16:19:22 GMT
Would mean more if they'd spent half the time covering Trump's many age-related foibles and outrageous statements as they have putting a microscope first on Biden and then on Harris' every move and utterance.
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Nov 3, 2024 17:46:16 GMT
|
|
|
|
Post by aj2hall on Nov 3, 2024 22:58:09 GMT
I thought this was an interesting question regarding their reporting of Trump www.nytimes.com/explain/2024/10/28/insider/elections-reader-questionsAddressing ‘sane-washing’ claims
I have always enjoyed reading the NYT. Lately, it seems that your journalists seem to “sane-wash” Trump’s speeches. So much attention was made on Biden’s age, gaffes and stumbles, and yet so little focus is put on the incoherence and rambling, slurring and outright lies that permeate Trump’s dialogue. What gives? — Sandy Martin, Salem, Mass.
Answered by Carolyn Ryan, a managing editor shaping politics coverage:
First of all, thank you for reading The Times and for the question, which I have heard from other readers during this election cycle.
I would start with this: We believe in providing readers with a deep and detailed understanding of the candidates for president. That means covering Donald Trump and Kamala Harris aggressively with a team of reporters from across the newsroom. For example, we have looked at the vice president’s record, her role as a prosecutor, her leadership style, her campaign donors and more.
When it comes to Mr. Trump, I don’t think there is any news organization that has revealed as much about his conduct, his character and his views as The Times has. We have dug deeply into stories about everything from his finances to his plans to reshape the federal government to his habitual lying.
In response to your particular concern, I will point out that we have published prominent stories about his age and his health. And three weeks ago, we featured a lengthy examination of his speeches, which have become increasingly rambling and, at times, incoherent and angry.
In the newsroom, we see our role clearly as providing independent journalism. That means probing, digging and explaining, rather than advocating for or against a particular candidate. It means arming the public with the information they need to make their choices in an election year.
Of course, it’s not possible for even the closest readers of The Times to read and remember every story we publish about the campaign and the candidates. That’s why, in the final stretch of the election, we are producing a special daily feature at the top of our website’s home page, highlighting some of our most important stories that capture the stakes in this election, and why we featured some of that work in a special presentation in print on Oct. 26.
I hope you will keep reading. And let us know how we are doing. |
|
