Comments

You have commented 339 times on Rantburg.

Your Name

Your e-mail (optional)

Website (optional)

	My Original Nic Pic-a-Nic Sorry. Comments have been closed on this article.
Foto

Submit your comments on this article

Home Front: Politix

New York Times chief outlines coverage shift: From Trump-Russia to Trump racism

2019-08-17

[WASHINGTONEXAMINER] Dean Baquet, the executive editor of the New York Times

...which still proudly displays Walter Duranty's Pulitzer prize...
, said recently that, after the Mueller report, the paper has to shift the focus of its coverage from the Trump-Russia affair to the president's alleged racism.

"We built our newsroom to cover one story, and we did it truly well," Baquet said. "Now we have to regroup, and shift resources and emphasis to take on a different story."

Baquet made the remarks at an employee town hall Monday. A recording was leaked to Slate, which published a transcript Thursday.

In the beginning of the Trump administration, the Times geared up to cover the Russia affair, Baquet explained. "Chapter 1 of the story of Donald Trump

...dictatorial for repealing some (but not all) of the diktats of his predecessor, misogynistic because he likes pretty girls, homophobic because he doesn't think gender bending should be mandatory, truly a man for all seasons......
, not only for our newsroom but, frankly, for our readers, was: Did Donald Trump have untoward relationships with the Russians, and was there obstruction of justice? That was a really hard story, by the way, let's not forget that. We set ourselves up to cover that story. I'm going to say it. We won two Pulitzer Prizes covering that story. And I think we covered that story better than anybody else."

But then came the Mueller report, with special counsel Robert Mueller failing to establish that the Trump campaign conspired or coordinated with Russia to fix the 2016 election. "The day Bob Mueller walked off that witness stand, two things happened," Baquet continued. "Our readers who want Donald Trump to go away suddenly thought, 'Holy shit, Bob Mueller is not going to do it.' And Donald Trump got a little emboldened politically, I think. Because, you know, for obvious reasons. And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we're talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We're a little tiny bit flat-footed. I mean, that's what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years. Right?"

Baquet used the gentlest terms possible ‐ "the story changed" ‐ but the fact is, the conspiracy-coordination allegation the Times had devoted itself to pursuing turned out to be false. Beyond that, Democrats on Capitol Hill struggled to press an obstruction case against the president. The Trump-Russia hole came up dry.

Now, Baquet continued, "I think that we've got to change." The Times must "write more deeply about the country, race, and other divisions."

"I mean, the vision for coverage for the next two years is what I talked about earlier: How do we cover a guy who makes these kinds of remarks?" Baquet said. "How do we cover the world's reaction to him? How do we do that while continuing to cover his policies? How do we cover America, that's become so divided by Donald Trump?"

The town hall was spurred by angry reaction, both inside and outside the Times, to a headline that many on the Left faulted for being insufficiently anti-Trump. After the El Paso shootings, when the president denounced white supremacy, the Times published a page-one story with the heading, "Trump Urges Unity Vs. Racism."

Posted by:Fred

#8 He's also semi-literate. Note how many filler words he lards his speech with: "like", "I mean", "right?"

The editor of our Paper of Record talks like a 13 year-old.

What a clown.

Posted by: Lex 2019-08-17 10:33

#7 MSM unlikely to cover their coverup.

Posted by: Bright Pebbles 2019-08-17 10:19

#6 An attack on the NYT would be, IMHO, a mistake.

We know that Trump has been demonized by the media for his attitude toward them and the entire scummy MSM would gang up on this one issue for the rest of the election.

I don't know how strong the public disdain for newsies is and if it would withstand the 24/7/365 drum beat.

Posted by: AlanC 2019-08-17 08:17

#5 :)

Posted by: Varmint Splat1454 2019-08-17 07:08

#4 Fine, VS. But leave that for the defense counsel to say.☺

Posted by: Dron66046 2019-08-17 06:49

#3 Dron66046, no one reads the NYSlimes.

Posted by: Varmint Splat1454 2019-08-17 05:48

#2 Doesn't that leaked video constitute evidence, even confession of slander/conspiracy/malfeasance/whatever covers it ?

Can't Trump initiate public action against the NYT on that ? I'm sure the president retains his rights as a common citizen too. Can't he just sue them if nothing else ?

Posted by: Dron66046 2019-08-17 05:31

#1 And I think that the story changed. A lot of the stuff we're talking about started to emerge like six or seven weeks ago. We're.. flat-footed. I mean, that's what happens when a story looks a certain way for two years.

What a shameless buffoon.

So the "story" isn't any real or verifiable news; it's an Alinsky narrative designed to placate "our readers who want Trump to go away."

When this lying poltroon says, "the story changed," he means, the story COLLAPSED.

Your "story" was a hoax.
You lied.
Shame on you. You owe the nation an apology.

Posted by: Lex 2019-08-17 04:01

00:00