0
147

[–] James557 0 points 147 points (+147|-0) ago 

I was actually a little surprised when I saw that article. It's the fucking New York Times, not gawker or buzzfeed. I thought they were supposed to hold their reporters to higher standards.

0
64

[–] spookybm 0 points 64 points (+64|-0) ago 

New York in general is losing its touch. I dont even bother reading newspaper as now it sounds like they are selling stories instead of actual reporting

0
50

[–] James557 0 points 50 points (+50|-0) ago 

It's really disappointing. It's virtually impossible to find an unbiased news source these days and the Times was (supposed to be) one of the few left. I even remember back in college, it was one of the VERY few news sources we were allowed to cite because they were known for journalistic integrity and unbiased reporting.

It's a shame to see what used to be one of the most respected news sources in the world devolving into nothing more than clickbaiting and whoring to whatever viewpoints are popular at the moment.

0
11

[–] whynotanon1 0 points 11 points (+11|-0) ago 

0
6

[–] mscomies 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Yeah, they're not the same publication that tried to publish the Pentagon Papers back in the 1970s. If Snowden went to the NYT instead of Glenn Greenwald, they would have ratted him out to the government.

8
-5

0
38

[–] sergeantslate 0 points 38 points (+38|-0) ago 

I wasn't. The NYTimes has been a very tricky news source, some of the articles being the best written pieces you can find, and others obviously bought and paid for by whatever entity.

Within my recent memory, NYTimes published an article in 2001 stating that WMDs were in fact found in Iran (which was never the case) with other calling to war. Another NYTimes journalist was called out by Tesla for lying about his trip and saying the mileage was worse than it actually was. Now this piece of feminist vitriolic garbage.

I'm sure there are others. It just goes to show you that no one news source is safe and making sure you get the facts yourself has become a necessity.

0
9

[–] James557 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

They've definitely swayed a bit here and there depending on where national opinion is at the moment (ie when they were being accused in the early 2000s by the far right of being too liberal, that definitely seeped into their reporting and started slightly favoring a right leaning viewpoint), and there have been what appeared to be isolated incidents like the ones you mentioned, but I really can't think of too many examples that were just blatant pandering outside of their opinion section.

Obviously I haven't read every single article throughout their history so I could be completely wrong, that's just the impression I've gotten and what I've seen over the years with em

0
6

[–] delicious_grownups 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

all the muck that's fit to rake

0
0

[–] glassuser 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Within my recent memory, NYTimes published an article in 2001 stating that WMDs were in fact found in Iran (which was never the case) with other calling to war.

Maybe they can see the future?

0
0

[–] Lost_Philosopher 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

Wasn't that whole "nukes in Iran" NYT article a huge scandal and a bunch of NYT higher ups and reporters got fired because of it?

0
16

[–] Rea11yN0tMe 0 points 16 points (+16|-0) ago  (edited ago)

For those interested, the author of the first version of the discussed NYT piece, Mike Isaac, did an AmA on KotakuInAction on Reddit. Here is the archive link: https://archive.is/oum1H


His introduction for the AmA:

I'm Mike Isaac, the New York Times Reporter covering Reddit. AmA.
Hey everyone, Mike Isaac here. I've been covering Reddit in some capacity for the past three years, and have been a redditor myself for roughly five.

I've also been writing about the changes and controversy recently at Reddit, and I'd be happy to provide you with whatever insight I can as I've reported the story. I wrote this piece today, which I'm currently rewriting for tomorrow's paper with a colleague as I do this AmA:

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/07/11/technology/ellen-pao-reddit-chief-executive-resignation.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&module=second-column-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

When I can't answer something because it strays into opinion or my sourcing, I'll let you know.

Thanks.

Edit: Added AmA heading

1
4

[–] James557 1 points 4 points (+5|-1) ago  (edited ago)

Going off of this I'd say his bias in the article seems generally unintentional, but it's still there and hopefully he'll be aware of it for future articles, regardless of the subject. It's the responsibility of any quality reporter to be aware of any personal bias they have, not include it in their reporting and objectively report facts, especially for somewhere like the NYT.

I do respect the fact that he did that AMA and was open to feedback and criticism.

Edit: also just want to acknowledge that the first version of that article (the Mike Issac one), was nowhere near as bad as the current one

0
1

[–] CmdrBearCat 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

While I heard the ama was a pretty big gong show, I'm just impressed that he went to KotakuInAction for it. Our little sub is getting a lot of attention from some big eyes.

0
10

[–] elloguvnor 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

But you'll never believe what happens next!

0
5

[–] Salicaz 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Paragraph 4 will shock you!

0
88

[–] TodayIsAGoodDay 0 points 88 points (+88|-0) ago  (edited ago)

Thank you for this. This is both frustrating and great to know about. NYT just lost a lot of respect from me.

What really irks me about the changes trying to make her gender an issue is saying that Reddit is primarily 15-29 male users. That takes less than 30 seconds to debunk:

  1. Load Alexa.com
  2. Search for Reddit
  3. Hover mouse over female bar at bottom of page.
  4. Read, "Relative to the general internet population, Females are over-represented at this site. Confidence: high"

Females are a larger population of Reddit than the average web page, and yet we have this male site narrative added to what was a news article that is factually untrue bullshit.

0
14

[–] sodaphish 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

That's a fascinating insight. Thank you for sharing.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 13 points (+13|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
20

[–] CrowTRobot 0 points 20 points (+20|-0) ago 

I am the only voat user without a degree. AMA.

0
5

[–] djdoeslinux 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

I have a theoretical degree in physics...

0
4

[–] Odins_Steed 0 points 4 points (+4|-0) ago 

Alexa says there's none here without a college degree

I'm a high school drop out. AMA

0
3

[–] ThisSeemsReasonable 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Hey, I'm a female college graduate, that has to count for something.

0
8

[–] Tabbynya 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I'm a girl. Ellen's a cunt, but she's the punchable face of the people pulling the strings.

0
0

[–] TodayIsAGoodDay 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

An absolutely possible theory. We'll never know for sure, but that theory requires a whole lot less tin foil than it did a month ago.

0
5

[–] weezkitty 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

To be fair, ranking sites like that are basically "best guess" since people are not surveyed or asked their gender. It's irrelevant anyway. The amount of comments attacking her based on gender were a tiny minority. The problem was not so much Ellen Pao personally but the fact that she disrespected the community.

0
1

[–] TodayIsAGoodDay 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Alexa site data is driven by people running the Alexa tool bar, which does survey your age, gender, income and education level. When a site is as popular as Reddit, Amazon has a huge data pool to pull from, meaning they can have a high degree of confidence based on their large sample size. It is not "basically 'best guess'".

The rest of your comment I agree with.

1
-1

[–] voat-simulator 1 points -1 points (+0|-1) ago 

I'd like to think the majority of goats share that attitude and that it's a case of a louder minority. Whether that's true or not, I have no idea.

0
48

[–] ClashingPants 0 points 48 points (+48|-0) ago 

It's becoming almost impossible to locate a trustworthy source of responsible, objective journalism.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 61 points (+61|-0) ago 

[Deleted]

0
38

[–] super_d_rawk 0 points 38 points (+38|-0) ago 

This is why sites like reddit and voat are popular. We, the users, sort out the crap and find the actual issues, which is what journalism is meant to do, but fails.

0
0

[–] hypercat 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

NPR?

0
9

[–] woofWOOFwoof 0 points 9 points (+9|-0) ago 

Part of the reason I dropped out of journalism school was because they insisted news outlets were as unbiased as possible and journalists were always as honest as possible. I got tired of raising my hand and providing counter-examples.

0
1

[–] ShadowMongoose 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Media Literacy was almost one of my minors in college. Spending that much time analyzing the media really turned me off ever working in the industry.

0
6

[–] Chinchurro 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Last week tonight's Online Harassment episode cut me to the core, I trusted them and was suddenly faced with circle jerk mentality and research. A Youtube commenter named lancelottodd described it the best:

This is the first time I've been totally disappointed with Last Week Tonight. Not because of this Anita person everyone seems to hate, but because this segment was a clear circle jerk that lacked any and all self-awareness. The first part about violent threats didn't need to differentiate between men and women at all. It did for some reason. Actually, it doesn't even suggest that any man could ever have his life threatened in a serious way on the internet, implying that having a white penis is some kind of protection to this. It specified women when it really didn't need to. The second focus, on online sexual harassment, surely affects more women that men, but when the tone is rightfully serious when referring to women and then LITERALLY MAKES A JOKE OUT OF IT when it happened to a man (Anthony Weiner,) I have to wonder if the producers even took one fucking second to think about what they were saying.

0
3

[–] Braastad 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

Journalism have turned into something controlled by the corporations who feed them; and they usually have their own agendas and ideas on how to control the news in their favor. Similar to how politics works.

The last few decades with the technology advancements and smartphones have enabled more people to see through this bullshit they serve us. It's just a shame not enough people have open their eyes yet.

[–] [deleted] 0 points 45 points (+45|-0) ago  (edited ago)

[Deleted]

0
14

[–] sodaphish 0 points 14 points (+14|-0) ago 

good job! the second is worse than the first... and that's fucking shocking, 'cause the first one was a shit-bag biased piece of whackjob.

0
5

[–] due 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

Incidents like this makes me think gamergate should lead us to take on something bigger. Gaming journalism is corrupt, but perhaps, that's how journalism has always been. I hope we can take on entire mainstream media and expose their bias and propaganda.

0
5

[–] weezkitty 0 points 5 points (+5|-0) ago 

What load of crap that is. Very few of the comments targeting her mentioned race or gender at all. Nice job with the SJW baiting.

0
0

[–] polymorphist 0 points 0 points (+0|-0) ago 

The after image is down, would you please rehost on veuwer?

0
33

[–] PasswordIsTaco 0 points 33 points (+33|-0) ago 

I just posted this comment elsewhere too:

The Guardian had an article about her resigning, and it was pretty standard, good article just listing the facts. Soon after they realised that didn't fit their narrative of her being a victim (something they've been pushing for months w/ her lawsuit/etc), so they re-wrote the whole article to say she resigned because of the abuse she was getting. So dumb.

(end of comment posted elsewhere)

It's crazy that they do this.

0
22

[–] In_Cog_Nito 0 points 22 points (+22|-0) ago 

0
8

[–] PasswordIsTaco 0 points 8 points (+8|-0) ago 

Awesome, thank you! How'd you find the original? I checked the NewsDiff site the OP link mentions, but the didn't do The Guardian site.

0
6

[–] codyave 0 points 6 points (+6|-0) ago 

Damn, The Guardian makes her out to be a victim of redditor abuse in the revised article.

0
3

[–] coconuts 0 points 3 points (+3|-0) ago 

0
7

[–] PasswordIsTaco 0 points 7 points (+7|-0) ago 

It was #2. They totally re-wrote it to its current form. I know it was the same article because they left the comments from the "old" version there. Reading #1 just shows how far they're willing to stretch though. It's crazy.

0
2

[–] refugee610 0 points 2 points (+2|-0) ago 

To be honest I expect that kind of thing from the Guardian anyway. It's a definite leftist mouthpiece nowadays.

0
23

[–] Forbin 0 points 23 points (+23|-0) ago  (edited ago)

I read the "revised" NYT article yesterday and was struck by how slanted it seemed. It seems like the tech press (especially press based in Silicon Valley) is hell-bent on advancing the narrative that Ellen Pao is a tragic victim in life. They consistently gloss over the fact that her claims of discrimination were found to be false by a jury. They hold her up as some type of moral beacon despite the fact that she was knowingly having an affair with a married co-worker, and despite the fact that her current husband is liable for millions of dollars for a ponzi scheme. In fact, the press conveniently omits any reference to the financial and legal troubles her husband's criminality has brought on, even though the amounts she has sued for are very close to the amount that her husband owes. The tech press consistently fails to mention the fact that many users were outraged that she selectively removed subs like FPH, but allowed much more egregious ones to continue, thereby creating an appearance no standard other than personal fiat. The ONLY voice in tech I've heard to hold her accountable is Jason Calacanis when he guest-hosted TWiT last week. Jason excoriated her ineptitude while the rest of the panel seemed hesitant to say anything negative about her. I found this especially interesting because Leo Laporte has gone all-in with political correctness and I've NEVER heard anyone on his network speak as frankly as Calacanis did about Pao. It is rare to hear any media reports about Pao (or Gamergate) that don't have a bias. Link to Calacanis comments

0
1

[–] EndDrugAndOtherWars 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

When you have the perfect person to push the narrative you want you, don't let the facts get in the way.

0
1

[–] whynotanon1 0 points 1 points (+1|-0) ago 

Thanks for the link, good content. TWiT is pretty cool, they have a very PC line of hosts and guest but occasionally they'll throw in Dvorak or Jason who aren't afraid to speak the truth that nobody wants to hear.

0
15

[–] rks 0 points 15 points (+15|-0) ago 

This sounds bad but we have the power to change this. The article speaks of newsdiff, a site that archives changes in articles after publication. Content aggregators like Voat (or even Reddit) should now link automatically to a content tracker (like newsdiff) that will let readers see exactly how changes are made.

The NYTimes will still get linked from all over the place elsewhere, but Voat would have more data : the article, its change, and Voat comments.

To us, linking to newsdiff (or archive.is) should become the default. Then this usage might propagate across the net and create net-wide accountability.

0
10

[–] lucidique 0 points 10 points (+10|-0) ago 

This is a bit frightening. Fortunately the original article can be found on a variety of archives and re-blogs around the web. Still, that's the dark side of the internet i guess.

load more comments ▼ (48 remaining)