This news doesn’t hurt my feelings at all. The New York Slimes isn’t really news anymore.
Absolutely ridiculous. I read the 125 Pulitzer Prize-winning NYT every day and it's chock full of news — maybe you bought a knockoff?
You Fake News™ types are really just clearly suckers for the age-old propaganda/disinformation campaign that Trump is recycling from the Soviets, Nazis, tin pot dictatorships, etc. Oldest trick in the book.
With a diatribe like that, jumping to all manner of conclusions with 0 facts about what the other poster meant, you might want to look in the mirror as to what the problem is...
I took what they said at face value. Do you honestly think there are facts buried in there somewhere that I'm not aware of? I already asked for clarification on what they meant, if they're not simply jumping on the "Fake News" bandwagon, and not sure yet if that's further down this thread or not yet. Fake news isn't a new concept — Hitler called it 'lügenpresse' ('press of lies'). Trump has said "A few days ago I called the fake news the enemy of the people and they are. They are the enemy of the people." — "the enemy of the people" in itself is not new tool either, it was used in the French Revolution to suppress opponents of Robespierre with some political crimes punishable by death, including "spreading false news to divide or trouble the people". The Soviets made extensive use of that term in various forms for the purpose of "physically annihilating" individuals who disagreed with Stalin, according to Kruschev. Trump's buddy Duterte calls out "fake news" all the time when they report on stuff he doesn't like. That's not debatable, it's historical fact. So when you declare a major and reputable news outlet as "fake", take a moment to realize who you're aligning yourself with here. The New York Times does not fit in this category at all, whether you like it or not.
How am I the problem? I didn't make any specious claims — the OP did though, and I reacted accordingly. Seems like you're triggered by this for some reason. Do you work for Breitbart or something?
Sounds like this will be quite a service. I don't expect to be on board though. The free News App has never been available in Canada. I doubt the pay service will be available here either. Regardless, $10/mo is more than I want to pay. I just don't have time to to read enough to make it worth it. I'll stick to BBC and CBC.
You really need Apple News! It's been announced for Canada for some time
Lol. Here you go not making sense again. Trump has *lost* over 1 billion $ since taking office. Look it up. In addition, he donates 100% of his presidential salary. The members of his family who are official paid advisors also donate 100% of their salary.
Sucking up to dictators? Lol. You mean being the first person to bring peace to the Korean peninsula in decades? What a terrible accomplishment!
Didn't have to talk about what during the Obama years?? You mean when Lybia was destroyed and the arab spring was started, leading to deaths and chaos, and leaving jihadist slave traders in Libya right now? Didn't talk about the creation of ISIS under Obama's watch? Btw, Trump has now defeated ISIS, which no longer holds any territory.
I could go on to even further debunk every one of your false statements, but you seem like you're mostly emotionally driven and aren't able to see things objectively, so I'll just stop here for now.
Lost a $ Billion? Look it up where, exactly, since he doesn't publish his alleged net worth.
First person to bring peace to Korea? HA! Truce since 1953. Name a military parameter that has changed since the North started their nuclear program. Fewer troops--no. Fewer weapons of mass destruction--decidedly no. Dismantling of nuclear development bases--no.
Sucking up to dictators? Yes, every time: Putin ("I believe him" [on everything]), Bin Salman ("I believe him"), Duterte (“He has a very high approval rating in the Philippines.”), Kim Jon-Un (I fell in love", “At a very young age, he was able to assume power...So obviously, he's a pretty smart cookie.”).
Trump, Obama and ISIS: ISIL (the correct acronym for Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant) was founded in 1999. Obama was elected in 2008.
Really, you couldn't even debunk your own mythology. Maybe you have the same disease pathology as Trump.
What?? This is just straight up delusion. Your post is both bizarre, and sad.
Look it it up as in google it. It’s a fact. Don’t blame me if you don’t know how to search for things on the internet.
Yes. Peace in Korea. How can you be so delusional about this. Even the last administration said NK was the biggest threat. There were constant missile tests, nuke tests, hostages, etc during the previous administrations. Now there are no missle tests, no nuke tests, hostages have been returned, soldiers remains have been returned, and peace talks are ongoing, with both sides stating a goal of denuclearization.
Sucking up to putin? Um, I don’t know if you’ve heard, but Putin is not exactly happy with trump. Trump strengthened nato, opposes Russia’s pipieline for fossil fuels that goes through Germany, is supporting Ukraine, etc. But you’re not happy because trump won’t publicly insult him and call him a liar? That is such a childish, myopic stance to take. Meanwhile, Obama did virtually nothing to protect Ukraine, and was caught on a hot mic telling the Russian president, “I’ll have more flexibility after the election.” You can’t make this stuff up!
Thank you for corrcting me on isil or whatever lol. And thank you for that helpful info on its founding date. However, none of those fun facts you blessed us with changes the fact that isil or isis gained tremendous territory during Obama’s tenure, including expanding their practice of systematic child rape, and it didn’t improve until trump came along and wiped them out.
Got any more selective facts that prove nothing lol? (Other than proving you having a strange aversion to reality.) Care to share what you mean by “disease pathology.” I’m going to go out on a limb here and guess you’re not a doctor.
That's the one area I think news can be improved. Move the opinion pieces off the front page to a separate section. Make it very clear the news is independent and generally fair, even though how a news article is written can still be biased. We need more news outlets that we can trust to dig deep and give us all the facts. Save the political hit pieces for somewhere else. Every editorial board is going to have its opinion, and it is well within their rights to write about it, but it should never be given as much publicity and credibility as a news article that is held to the journalistic ethical standards.
I don't see the problem. They're clearly labeled as "Opinion" and can be avoided just as easily as I avoid those labeled "Sports". I, for one, don't want the Opinion pieces buried, and neither do their board of directors and editors.
But, it it has become a problem as opinion, analysis, and spin are interwoven with actual news they become harder and harder to separate and tell apart. This is particularly troublesome on cable news -- which also adds facial expressions, tone and body language to the mix (one smirk can change an entire story).
The New York Times is worth every penny you pay it... for top-level news coverage. Thank God for them.
Too bad Bezos won't give up his love of profit, but that's that.
I'll definitely subscribe to Apple News Service long enough to see if it is worth it to me... and if I have enough time to also read the NYT, the Guardian, the Huffington Post, and The Nation, that I subscribe to.
All Americans _need_ to be informed in these dark days of Donald. It's your civic duty.
I don’t like Donald very much, but dark days? Where were these truth tellers in Obama years?
He wasn’t fucking up the country every week while lining his pockets and those of family members while also banging porn stars and bribing them to keep quiet about it. Oh and sucking up to dictators who he believes are “good guys”. None of this is normal presidential behavior. We didn’t have to talk about it during the Obama years because none of that happened. This isn’t rocket science.
Lol. Here you go not making sense again. Trump has *lost* over 1 billion $ since taking office. Look it up. In addition, he donates 100% of his presidential salary. The members of his family who are official paid advisors also donate 100% of their salary.
Sucking up to dictators? Lol. You mean being the first person to bring peace to the Korean peninsula in decades? What a terrible accomplishment!
Didn't have to talk about what during the Obama years?? You mean when Lybia was destroyed and the arab spring was started, leading to deaths and chaos, and leaving jihadist slave traders in Libya right now? Didn't talk about the creation of ISIS under Obama's watch? Btw, Trump has now defeated ISIS, which no longer holds any territory.
I could go on to even further debunk every one of your false statements, but you seem like you're mostly emotionally driven and aren't able to see things objectively, so I'll just stop here for now.
He’s lost money, though the amount is up to debate, its not likely that much. But that’s because a lot of people don’t like him, and are ticked with the horrible things he says. They’re avoiding his properties like the plague. Still, what he’s doing with his resorts and hotels is wrong.
The New York Times is worth every penny you pay it... for top-level news coverage. Thank God for them.
Too bad Bezos won't give up his love of profit, but that's that.
I'll definitely subscribe to Apple News Service long enough to see if it is worth it to me... and if I have enough time to also read the NYT, the Guardian, the Huffington Post, and The Nation, that I subscribe to.
All Americans _need_ to be informed in these dark days of Donald. It's your civic duty.
Yes, we really need NYT and WaPo to put out 10 stories a day about trump based on unsubstantiated anonymous leakers in these “dark days” lol. What a joke.
We don’t need agenda-based, biased MSM organizations that consistently put out 93% negative coverage of one person. That’s not news. That’s biased opinion fed to sheep.
Apple may be one of the only hopes to facilitate objective journalism. I’m actually very much looking forward for trying out the Apple news service.
Honestly, if Trump wasn’t so, well I’ll be nice here, and say “odd”, there wouldn’t be so much about him in the papers. Even the WSJ has a lot of stories, and they’ve become more negative as time goes on. Like it or not, he’s the President, and every time he does or says something, and he says a lot, it’s going to be written about. Fox has far more about him than everyone else combined.
Don't you find it a bit 'odd' that there is a constant barrage of breathlessly hyperbolic articles about how 'odd' (ie "un-presidential") Trump is?? How many 'sky is falling' and 'omg the world is ending' articles about Trump must there be?? Meanwhile, we have the best economy in decades (possibly history), lowest minority and female unemployment in history, peace in the Korean peninsula (thought to be the US's biggest threat by the previous administration), on and on..
I think the biased coverage is the most odd thing. I, and many others, find Trump's oddness and straightforwardness appealing (although I am not a personal fan of his more boisterous tweets and statements).
I just checked WaPo's front (web) page in case I misremembered. Almost EVERY story on the front page is directly or indirectly negative towards Trump. Almost EVERY one! It's crazy. No wonder there are so many bizarrely irrational Trump haters out there. Just about every story out there is negative.
No, I don’t. And no we certainly don’t have the best economy in decades, and it’s funny that anyone would ever parrot his words about the best economy ever. That’s really funny. The trends that have been happening over the last 8 years before he came on board were continuing while he’s been here. The first year of a presidency is from the last presidents budget, as you should know. It takes about 3 months for his first budget to make an impression. So that a year 3 months before a new president has any real influence over the economy. So what happened? Major tax cuts which encourages a spurt of short time spending. Then the government spent a lot of money which gave a short term boost. The two together added $1.5 trillion to the national debt. After that was done, the economy started to slow down. This quarter, we’ll see growth down to about 2.5%. Going lower later in the year. Next year, about 2% by the concensue of economists, both right and left. Of course, the Wh is predicting 2.8%, but nobody believes it.
those are the facts.
here’s an example of the Jobs trend. Notice his statements along the way
‘There is no peace in the Korean Peninsula. They rebuilt the testing area they took down, are building more weapons, according to experts. They just pulled out of the agreements with South Korea. Meanwhile Trump reverses the embargo his own treasury department set, over their objections. Peace, yeah sure.
we do not have the lowest unemployment in history for minorities and women. Where do you get this junk from, Fox?
the problem is that you don’t know Trump the way some of us do. We, in NYC, know him as a criminally adept person, who has cheated his way into everything, and lied his way through the rest. We also know him as someone who takes credit for what others do, while foisting his own mistakes onto others. A long while before he ran for president, he tried to join the New York Real Estate Board. The rejected him, calling him a “slime ball huckster”. Yup, that’s what he is.
i like msn news feed, apple better do a better job (both in news quality and limited data transmission - msn news compressed many in a single page without too many memory usage and it is free - at least not ask any money yet). I get RSS feed of NYT, BBC, CNN and CBC, but for msn, i get much more on web page... and update well in time. for a free (limited or near no ads) news, i am happy. Let's see if apple can provide added "value" as payed service.
Does anyone really trust the NYT or Washington Post for news anymore, anyway?
Who do you trust then? The opinion section of the WSJ? Even their news, which has always been somewhat conservative before Murdoch took over, has becom in a number of ways a parrot for the editorial board.
Fox? A right wing friend has to,d me that he knows what is true because Fox say what that is. He cares nothing about other news sources, unless they something from the right wing talk radio.
the problem with that right wing is that according to them, anything that isn’t right wing is socialist. They lack the ability to understand the slow shifts between right and left. This is a problem.
Does anyone really trust the NYT or Washington Post for news anymore, anyway?
Who do you trust then? The opinion section of the WSJ? Even their news, which has always been somewhat conservative before Murdoch took over, has becom in a number of ways a parrot for the editorial board.
Fox? A right wing friend has to,d me that he knows what is true because Fox say what that is. He cares nothing about other news sources, unless they something from the right wing talk radio.
the problem with that right wing is that according to them, anything that isn’t right wing is socialist. They lack the ability to understand the slow shifts between right and left. This is a problem.
The best position is to hear what both extremes are saying, then find moderate interpretations of events then try to sift it all out. “News” is often one side or person or organization promoting their own interests. The politics surrounding events are again just their means to advance their own interests.
Does anyone really trust the NYT or Washington Post for news anymore, anyway?
Who do you trust then? The opinion section of the WSJ? Even their news, which has always been somewhat conservative before Murdoch took over, has becom in a number of ways a parrot for the editorial board.
Fox? A right wing friend has to,d me that he knows what is true because Fox say what that is. He cares nothing about other news sources, unless they something from the right wing talk radio.
the problem with that right wing is that according to them, anything that isn’t right wing is socialist. They lack the ability to understand the slow shifts between right and left. This is a problem.
The best position is to hear what both extremes are saying, then find moderate interpretations of events then try to sift it all out. “News” is often one side or person or organization promoting their own interests. The politics surrounding events are again just their means to advance their own interests.
Some news isn’t actually news, it’s supporting a specific, often extreme position, no matter what.
Does anyone really trust the NYT or Washington Post for news anymore, anyway?
Who do you trust then? The opinion section of the WSJ? Even their news, which has always been somewhat conservative before Murdoch took over, has becom in a number of ways a parrot for the editorial board.
Fox? A right wing friend has to,d me that he knows what is true because Fox say what that is. He cares nothing about other news sources, unless they something from the right wing talk radio.
the problem with that right wing is that according to them, anything that isn’t right wing is socialist. They lack the ability to understand the slow shifts between right and left. This is a problem.
The best position is to hear what both extremes are saying, then find moderate interpretations of events then try to sift it all out. “News” is often one side or person or organization promoting their own interests. The politics surrounding events are again just their means to advance their own interests.
Some news isn’t actually news, it’s supporting a specific, often extreme position, no matter what.
Does anyone really trust the NYT or Washington Post for news anymore, anyway?
Who do you trust then? The opinion section of the WSJ? Even their news, which has always been somewhat conservative before Murdoch took over, has becom in a number of ways a parrot for the editorial board.
Fox? A right wing friend has to,d me that he knows what is true because Fox say what that is. He cares nothing about other news sources, unless they something from the right wing talk radio.
the problem with that right wing is that according to them, anything that isn’t right wing is socialist. They lack the ability to understand the slow shifts between right and left. This is a problem.
The best position is to hear what both extremes are saying, then find moderate interpretations of events then try to sift it all out. “News” is often one side or person or organization promoting their own interests. The politics surrounding events are again just their means to advance their own interests.
That belief is what spawned the False Equivalencies that spawned Trump. Truth doesn't matter and that Alternative Facts are facts rather than lies.
Comments
I took what they said at face value. Do you honestly think there are facts buried in there somewhere that I'm not aware of? I already asked for clarification on what they meant, if they're not simply jumping on the "Fake News" bandwagon, and not sure yet if that's further down this thread or not yet. Fake news isn't a new concept — Hitler called it 'lügenpresse' ('press of lies'). Trump has said "A few days ago I called the fake news the enemy of the people and they are. They are the enemy of the people." — "the enemy of the people" in itself is not new tool either, it was used in the French Revolution to suppress opponents of Robespierre with some political crimes punishable by death, including "spreading false news to divide or trouble the people". The Soviets made extensive use of that term in various forms for the purpose of "physically annihilating" individuals who disagreed with Stalin, according to Kruschev. Trump's buddy Duterte calls out "fake news" all the time when they report on stuff he doesn't like. That's not debatable, it's historical fact. So when you declare a major and reputable news outlet as "fake", take a moment to realize who you're aligning yourself with here. The New York Times does not fit in this category at all, whether you like it or not.
How am I the problem? I didn't make any specious claims — the OP did though, and I reacted accordingly. Seems like you're triggered by this for some reason. Do you work for Breitbart or something?
I'd expect it next week:
https://appleinsider.com/articles/19/01/24/apple-news-coming-to-canada-with-ios-122-beta
No, I don’t. And no we certainly don’t have the best economy in decades, and it’s funny that anyone would ever parrot his words about the best economy ever. That’s really funny. The trends that have been happening over the last 8 years before he came on board were continuing while he’s been here. The first year of a presidency is from the last presidents budget, as you should know. It takes about 3 months for his first budget to make an impression. So that a year 3 months before a new president has any real influence over the economy. So what happened? Major tax cuts which encourages a spurt of short time spending. Then the government spent a lot of money which gave a short term boost. The two together added $1.5 trillion to the national debt. After that was done, the economy started to slow down. This quarter, we’ll see growth down to about 2.5%. Going lower later in the year. Next year, about 2% by the concensue of economists, both right and left. Of course, the Wh is predicting 2.8%, but nobody believes it.
those are the facts.
here’s an example of the Jobs trend. Notice his statements along the way
‘There is no peace in the Korean Peninsula. They rebuilt the testing area they took down, are building more weapons, according to experts. They just pulled out of the agreements with South Korea. Meanwhile Trump reverses the embargo his own treasury department set, over their objections. Peace, yeah sure.
we do not have the lowest unemployment in history for minorities and women. Where do you get this junk from, Fox?
the problem is that you don’t know Trump the way some of us do. We, in NYC, know him as a criminally adept person, who has cheated his way into everything, and lied his way through the rest. We also know him as someone who takes credit for what others do, while foisting his own mistakes onto others. A long while before he ran for president, he tried to join the New York Real Estate Board. The rejected him, calling him a “slime ball huckster”. Yup, that’s what he is.
Fox? A right wing friend has to,d me that he knows what is true because Fox say what that is. He cares nothing about other news sources, unless they something from the right wing talk radio.
the problem with that right wing is that according to them, anything that isn’t right wing is socialist. They lack the ability to understand the slow shifts between right and left. This is a problem.