General Discussion

Scrivener7

(60,351 posts)

43. Do you really need to read about those internal documents to

Thu Jun 25, 2026, 06:59 AM

1 hr ago

prove to you that there are no marauding Antifa pool slashers?

Will the New York Times next be reporting about documents that tell us water is wet?

Edit history

Please sign in to view edit histories.

Recommendations

0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):

44 replies

= new reply since forum marked as read

Highlight:

I cannot get this NYT article out of my mind. It's everything that's wrong with the media today. [View all] Scrivener7 21 hrs ago OP

I had the same reaction, Scrivener choie 21 hrs ago #1

Excellently phrased!!! n/t returnee 21 hrs ago #2

Thank you! Scrivener7 21 hrs ago #4

They aren't stupid. Wednesdays 21 hrs ago #3

I agree. But I'm beginning to think it is going to backfire on them. They're doing it to Scrivener7 21 hrs ago #5

Media are owned by oligarchs. usonian 20 hrs ago #6

Yes, but to what end? What is the advantage to them of making the media too stupid to pay any attention to? Scrivener7 18 hrs ago #27

I watch ABC Nightly News ( which has lately become the ABC Nightly Weather Channel for some reason) Ray Bruns 20 hrs ago #7

There is a flip side here. Trump is an attention hog. By not talking about him you undermine his relevancy. flashman13 20 hrs ago #10

There's a paradox relogic 20 hrs ago #13

I agree that there is a paradox here, but I think there is a work around. What needs to happen is to focus flashman13 19 hrs ago #23

The solution is to give him the coverage he's earned BaronChocula 18 hrs ago #25

Yes. Why any outlet pays a White House correspondent under this regime is beyond me. Scrivener7 18 hrs ago #28

My husband and I predict the lead story: Tornadoes/weather, airplanes falling out of sky/colliding, shootings, Trump. betsuni 20 hrs ago #11

This is a great headline. I approve of their approach. reACTIONary 20 hrs ago #8

Seriously, I'm asking. Tell me why. Because I just don't understand. Scrivener7 18 hrs ago #29

For several reasons, and with one exception.... reACTIONary 16 hrs ago #30

I hear you. And thank you for taking the time. But I'm still going to disagree. Scrivener7 15 hrs ago #32

Personally, I think investigating the claim is better... reACTIONary 14 hrs ago #33

We disagree, but I do appreciate the conversation. Be well. Scrivener7 14 hrs ago #35

You also!!! reACTIONary 14 hrs ago #36

Because it's made you forget about Epstein questionseverything 13 hrs ago #37

Not me! Scrivener7 13 hrs ago #38

Well yes, they DO know, but they keep dancing around it FakeNoose 20 hrs ago #9

The media dance the bumbling two-step as well as trump. erronis 20 hrs ago #12

One could argue that the NYT is already useless and basically preaching to the choir. maxsolomon 20 hrs ago #14

Seriously.......... popsdenver 19 hrs ago #15

You.. homegirl 19 hrs ago #17

(NOT!)newsmax is even more propaganda driven than fuxnews. yellow dahlia 19 hrs ago #18

Sorry, but people vastly overestimate the number of people who watch Fox News Wiz Imp 19 hrs ago #22

Thanks! Those are interesting numbers! reACTIONary 14 hrs ago #34

"which went into his cronies' pockets,"...And most probably into his, or his family's pockets. Escurumbele 19 hrs ago #16

The tragedy that people need to understand is the fact that to cover his grift and stupity, Escurumbele 19 hrs ago #19

Right! Raise doubts? yellow dahlia 19 hrs ago #20

Every night from 1979 to 1981 BidenRocks 19 hrs ago #21

They're smart people. They know what they're doing. Politicub 19 hrs ago #24

;-{) THIS Goonch 18 hrs ago #26

Now they cater to the few Magats reading their crap mdbl 15 hrs ago #31

They probably couldn't afford to send a real reporter so they paid Maggie to write something that would not cause Trump 3Hotdogs 12 hrs ago #39

"Being useless" is, in fact, useful to some. hay rick 10 hrs ago #40

So your problem is evidence? iemanja 8 hrs ago #41

Do you really need to read about those internal documents to Scrivener7 1 hr ago #43

For many years, I used to believe that journalism should present facts and let the reader decide. SouthBayDem 6 hrs ago #42

Simple. OldBaldy1701E 26 min ago #44