A great example of corporate/state propaganda. Go fuck yourself Bret.
The same New York Times that downplayed Germany's treatment of their Jewish population in 1939. FROM THEIR CORRESPONDENT IN BERLIN!
They've always been the benign face of evil. Palatable enough to appear left, but just parroting the same distractions and obfuscations.
Was that also duranty?
Wait, there are people who don't realize all the major newspapers are owned by billionaires and thus have severe capital and corporate biases independent of their policial leaning?
this is america. lacking media literacy is our whole deal. we tell ourselves to avoid propaganda, stick to the "real news" then people who grew up surrounded by propaganda come here and are like "oh holy shit, y'all actively consume propaganda, this is WILD"
But NYT is"publicly" owned!
So is the federal government, that's why it's okay when we're mistreated and oppressed - the majority of public voted for it. Excuse me, the "majority of the public" voted for it.
>opinion columnist
Opinion columnist who they saw fit to print. Do you see any opinions there that are examining why the murder has been so widely celebrated, rather than manufactured consent crap like this?
No one ever cares here. The NYT does this explicitly to avoid being an echo chamber but, well, people love echo chambers.
You mean "launder shit they couldn't in a million years justify publishing otherwise"?
This was also an editorial: https://workingclasshistory.com/wp-content/uploads/2022/07/02.03-irrefutable-Washington-Post.jpg
I'm confused, this is an article from the Washington Post?
You are confused: it's an editorial from the Washington Post.
Ok, but isn't the OP about the NYT?
The root comment of this chain, to which you responded to, is, in it's entirety:
opinion columnist
It does not specify a paper. Nor is the practice of employing columnists for opinion laundering limited to the NYT.
Sure, but the context of the post is NYT. Feel free to start your own thread about the WP I guess?
No, the context is opinion columns. Or are you making the claim that NYT, specifically, does not engage in the practice, unlike WaPo?
No I'm making that claim that the title to this post has the world's New York Times in the title and you're deciding you want to have a different conversation, which is fine, but why do you gotta hijack someone else's thread to do it? Make your own post and do it there.
No. Once again, the root post of this chain is, in it's entirety ">opinion columnist". Your response is that NYT does this to prevent echo chambers. My response is to object, not to the NYT part, but to the to prevent echo chambers part.
You're choosing to ignore that the branch post you're referring to is responding to the root post about the New York Times.
Here's some facts, about the NYT (from when they were called op-ed pieces, it was changed in 2021):
https://www.nytimes.com/2017/12/03/insider/opinion-op-ed-explainer.html
The Opinion section operates editorially independently from the rest of the newspaper. It is the section’s unique mission both to be the voice of The Times, and to challenge it. The Op-Ed pages were born, in part, because of the closing of New York’s top conservative newspaper, The New York Herald Tribune. They were created to be opposite the editorial pages — and not just physically.
The funny part is that I think pretty much everyone hates them, and that's kind of the point. If you never read anything outside of your echo chamber, you'll never know how absolutely ridiculous some of these very widely believed opinions are.
Yes, yes I am choosing to ignore it, because it's irrelevant to the point I'm making, because the point I'm making is that they're not there to break up the echo chamber, they're the second wall of it, and unless you make a special case for the NYT, they are neither exempt not unique about it.
Well I'm glad you're back on track talking about the subject at hand. Took you a while but you got there. Maybe don't take so many detours next time.
Regarding the subject at hand, I guess you're entitled to your own opinion then too, aren't you?
...I'm sorry, I think you meant to post this in reply to a different post.
Nope.
Are you sure you're not just confused again?
I'm just happy you agreed to stick to the topic.
Just cancelled my $1/wk subscription to NYT and straight up filled out all the surveys and feedback bits to say Bret Stephens sucks.
I can’t read Bret Stephens’ bullshit. I try, but it’s always nauseating.
Old Bedbug Bret Stephens at it again!
My anus is not the source of a horrible pile of feces, Bret Stephens is
New York nazi Times.
I find the article very interesting as a piece of propaganda - it plays heavily into the classic rags to riches meme - just focuses on the individual so to completely ignore the systemic problems that he perpetuated in his "earned" position.
Many people thought the establishment was on their side. Now they realize they couldn't give a shit about them.
Nah man, please stop, let's do some culture wars... You wouldn't want to kick of a class war?
The media & establishment has been waging class warfare for as long as I can remember. Usually they have everyone fighting amongst themselves. They're scared that people are seeing the real perpetrators for once.
Dead CEO won't reform the industry. Gonna take a ton of public pressure for that.
And they are already chipping away at unity.
Pointing out, debunking, and spreading awareness about state- and company-sponsored astroturfing on Lemmy and elsewhere. This includes social media manipulation, propaganda, and disinformation campaigns, among others.
Propaganda and disinformation are a big problem on the internet, and the Fediverse is no exception.
What's the difference between misinformation and disinformation? The inadvertent spread of false information is misinformation. Disinformation is the intentional spread of falsehoods.
By equipping yourself with knowledge of current disinformation campaigns by state actors, corporations and their cheerleaders, you will be better able to identify, report and (hopefully) remove content matching known disinformation campaigns.
Same as instance rules, plus:
