Passive construction and ambiguity instead of active verbs and finger-pointing has undermined what should have been pro-democracy coverage in the Washington Post and the New York Times.
A front-page article by Jonathan Weisman asserted that "just what is threatening democracy depends on who you talk to."
New evidence shows that New York Times management doesn’t just underappreciate diversity in its newsroom, but actively devalues it.
There’s currently no widely acceptable way for the rich, white and cis to directly express their desire to maintain their position of control and power and superiority over others. So all the emotional intensity – and money – behind that worldview gets poured into this insane bucket of anti-wokeism.
Activating a “Democracy Team” -- like the Times did -- doesn’t do much good if the rest of the newsroom is on Team Impunity.
The Times has lost its bearings when it comes to political coverage -- at the worst possible time. The new editor, Joe Kahn, will need to betray his predecessor to put it back on course.
Almost no pick-up. No follow-ups. This is how a great story was left to die.
I told Tom Edsall that journalists should reject right-wing framing on culture-war issues. Then -- surprise! – Edsall went right off and did exactly what I advised against.
An editorial asserting a right not to be held accountable by others for what you say signifies a fatal rot at the heart of the New York Times editorial board.
Friday's New York Times politics newsletter was a masterpiece of amoral and irresponsible political relativism. It inspired a brilliant parody, based on how the newsletter's authors would have reported after the 1929 stock market crash.