Hacker News Reader

Comment by zozbot234 | Hacker News Reader

> NYT misquoted us to fit a prescribed narrative

Join the club! Maybe there was something to Mr. Trump's quips about the "Fake News Media".

The New York Times reporting around Trump and the coronavirus was much, much worse (including just outright lying about how the US response compared to other countries). This just reads like the NYT drew attention to non-cooperation by China which some of the WHO investigators don't want to see criticised publicly for geopolitical reasons and have decided to downplay. In particular, the NYT and other publications have claimed that China denied the WHO access to specific, important information about the initial cases which they would normally have, and nothing in these tweets seems to refute that claim. They just say vague stuff about China giving them access to some data.

There was (and is), but you're not going to find many that agree on here. (Even in the comment section of a supporting data point.)

People who dislike Trump (the majority of HN readers) are strongly biased to react negatively at the very mention of his name.

Ironically, a not-insignificant contributing reason for this is... corrupt and biased news media.

I'll patiently await my tribal downvotes, now...

Whether I agree with the post or not, if someone throws a preemptive claim of downvote martyrdom, I will always comply and downvote them.

Thank you for your reply and reasoned downvote.

Not exactly martyrdom, though. I've posted enough "Trump was demonstrably not wrong in this context" comments that have been downvoted into oblivion that my account has negative karma. So that was an inappropriate, snarky comment for me to make, and definitely not necessary to ensure downvotes.

This despite the fact that I do not support Trump, but rather oppose the tribalism that's plaguing the US. (All of which is to the benefit of media, various corporations, and sundry elite.)

In any case, very opposed to the current state of media, as they effectively shape the culture practically unchecked. I hope whether you agree or disagree with parent comment, you recognize the unfortunate and inappropriate abuses of their power, in whatever contexts you may find them.

One nice perk of journalists doing much of their research on Google nowadays is that a layman can too -- there is little moat around journalism anymore. So a couple years back I decided to take an informal random sampling of news articles from respectable US newspapers, and dig up the source material associated with those events. I found that when you looked at the sources, about 3/4 of the claims made about Trump were either deeply misleading, or outright false.

The WMD debacle killed my trust in media, but this was beyond my expectations. I can only hope the sample was not representative.

I can say with unscientific specificity that for 6 months following the start of COVID, I was buried in media on both sides of the spectrum and researched as much as I could.

Right wing media was largely... not "wrong", I guess? But they didn't say a whole lot that went beyond adjective-laden editorial that was neither true nor false. (How does one quantify "a lot" or "promising", exactly?)

On the other hand, left wing media was (obviously) hugely anti-Trump, but made claims that were often entirely disingenuous and dishonest. (And in some cases, outright false.)

In both cases, neither side did a good job "reporting" the news. The right was flush with fluff, and the left chock full of half truths. In both, they simply left stuff out that was relevant.

It's hard to judge which was "worse", because both weren't honest. I'm inclined to lean on saying the left may have been worse because they engaged in an unending assault that was unquestionably more "active" at being dishonest..? But then, as Orwell said, "Pacifism is objectively pro-fascist."

So... it's just a bad look all around right now. Thank goodness for beacons like Greenwald and Taibbi. (And Catherine Herridge. And I'm sure some others I'm missing.)

There is fake news, and Fake News, the propaganda term used by Mr Trump as a weapon against anybody who used to disagree with him.

I agree that honest journalism these days is a lost art, but I do not care to be associated with far right American propaganda, thanks.

Perhaps—and I respect your acknowledgment of the problem—but that is a false dichotomy.

A tremendous amount of opposition news was false and also propaganda, so perhaps you're just picking sides. But I'm of the opinion that there is one area in which both sides could unite for the benefit of the entire country: against propaganda in any form.

So basically you don’t want to appear in support of anything Trump said...if you read back what you wrote you will realize the mental gymnastics you are doing because you are not free to speak your mind because of today’s political discourse climate and cancel culture.

More and more "news" is just meant to fit an agenda. Trump just called it out and gave it a term.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com