Misplaced Pages

Revision as of 10:53, 28 December 2016

This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the The New York Times article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject.

Put new text under old text. Click here to start a new topic. New to Misplaced Pages? Welcome! Learn to edit; get help. Assume good faith Be polite and avoid personal attacks Be welcoming to newcomers Seek dispute resolution if needed Article policies Neutral point of view No original research Verifiability

Find sources: Google (books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL

Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8Auto-archiving period: 3 months

	The New York Times has been listed as one of the Social sciences and society good articles under the good article criteria. If you can improve it further, please do so. If it no longer meets these criteria, you can reassess it.
Article milestones Date Process Result October 16, 2008 Good article nominee Listed

Template:Vital article

This article has not yet been rated on Misplaced Pages's content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects:

Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Brands High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Brands, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of brands on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.BrandsWikipedia:WikiProject BrandsTemplate:WikiProject BrandsBrands High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Freedom of speech Mid‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Freedom of speech, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Freedom of speech on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.Freedom of speechWikipedia:WikiProject Freedom of speechTemplate:WikiProject Freedom of speechFreedom of speech Mid This article has been rated as Mid-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. Journalism Top‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject Journalism, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of journalism on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.JournalismWikipedia:WikiProject JournalismTemplate:WikiProject JournalismJournalism Top This article has been rated as Top-importance on the project's importance scale. Please add the quality rating to the {{WikiProject banner shell}} template instead of this project banner. See WP:PIQA for details. New York City High‑importance This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York City, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of New York City-related articles on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York CityWikipedia:WikiProject New York CityTemplate:WikiProject New York CityNew York City High This article has been rated as High-importance on the project's importance scale. Media This article is within the scope of WikiProject Media, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Media on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.MediaWikipedia:WikiProject MediaTemplate:WikiProject MediaMedia ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale. WikiProject Media To-do List: Here are some tasks awaiting attention: Cleanup : Media influence, Video game culture, Sound bite NPOV : Content (media and publishing) Verify : Multimedia, Alternative media, Alternative newspaper Other : Answer requests for comments New York (state) This article is within the scope of WikiProject New York (state), a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of the U.S. state of New York on Misplaced Pages. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.New York (state)Misplaced Pages:WikiProject New York (state)Template:WikiProject New York (state)New York (state) ??? This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

This article has been mentioned by a media organization: McQuillan, Karin (June 13, 2012). "Misplaced Pages's Jewish Problem". FrontPageMag.com.

A fact from this article was featured on Misplaced Pages's Main Page in the On this day section on September 18, 2004, June 13, 2009, and September 18, 2014.

How did it become a Jewish community sheet

There should be more on how this newspaper became so Jewish dominated. No doubt this will be called anti-semitic, but that will only confirm the dominance of the Jewish narrative here on Misplaced Pages, as on the NYT. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 220.244.35.123 (talk) 15:09, 13 August 2016 (UTC)

Sourced content

An anonymous editor added this content. The references need to be formatted and the sourcing and writing sorted out, but notable content should be included in the encyclopedia.

Early in the 2008 presidential election, the New York Times published an article alleging that Republican candidate John McCain may have had a relationship with a female lobbyist, but the article was criticized by the Times' ombudsman for not being accurate.

The ombudsman wrote: "The newspaper found itself in the uncomfortable position of being the story as much as publishing the story, in large part because, although it raised one of the most toxic subjects in politics -- sex -- it offered readers no proof that McCain and (Vicki) Iseman had a romance."

The New York Times was also accused of spiking a story about Democratic candidate Barack Obama's relationship with the group ACORN during the election. Times reporter Stephanie Strom had been working on some stories about ACORN, using a source within the organization named Anita Moncrief. A phone call between Ms. Strom and Ms. Moncrief had Ms. Strom saying, "Hi, Anita, it’s Stephanie. I have just been asked by my bosses to stand down. … They want me to hold off on coming to Washington. Ah, sorry, I take my orders from higher up, ah, sometimes." The Times responded to inquiries by saying, that "Political considerations played no role in our decision about whether to cover this story."

References

1. NY Times on John McCain and Lobbyist
2. Ombudsman Slams Article on McCain
3. Ombudsman Slams Article on McCain
4. Times Spiked Obama Donor Story
5. O'Reilly Factor
6. O'Reilly Factor

Insertion of CEO of New York Times

Anti-Irish slurs

I feel that this section should be edited. Thoughts: 1) Not sure if the exact date of the article is necessary? 2) Would prefer more focus on the backlash/controversy than on a summary of the article itself. The summary is fine but the balance doesn't seem to be there. There are lots of controversial articles in the Times - in order to warrant inclusion in this Misplaced Pages article, the controversy should be pretty significant, so we should focus on the response more than the content of the article. 3) I skimmed the article and I didn't notice "slurs" (nor did the section of this page mention "slurs") - rather, I see a tone and some blanket statements/generalizations and insensitivity that are potentially offensive towards the Irish. I think the section should be renamed as when I hear "slur" I think of nouns/specific phrases that are targeted at a group of people; I don't think that's what this is. -KaJunl (talk) 16:05, 7 September 2015 (UTC)

What's the point of having this category if friends of The Times can delete entries. It a fact that The Times has a long history of anti-Irish slurs and it shouldn't be allowed to censor and cover them up. Here's an example of censored material:

The Times has an old history of these slurs, dating from July 16, 1871 and a repugnant discussion of the Irish character that followed the Orange and Green "riots" when scores of "rioters" were gunned down by panicked militia. In 1875, The Times opined that "New York was not an American City." There were too many Irish immigrants who were not American in their ways and who, if allowed to vote in New York City elections, would "deprive Americans by birth and descent of the small share they yet retain in the control of its affairs."

The Times has a perennial problem with blaming Irish immigrants for the New York City draft riots of 1863, even though opposition to Lincoln and the draft was incited by New York City politicians and businessmen with ties to the South. The leaders of these pro-South interests were Governor Horatio Seymour, August Belmont, Samuel Morse, Fernando Wood, Samuel Tilden, and Manton Marble. None of these leaders were Irish or Catholic. Belmont, for example, was a German immigrant, American agent for the Rothschilds, and in-law of Confederate politician John Slidell, an expatriate New Yorker with Anglo-Scots roots and a Columbia University degree. This anti-Lincoln and anti-Emancipation group’s propaganda organs were the New York World and The Society for Diffusion of Political Knowledge. In fact the vast of majority of New York’s 800,000 citizens, including the city’s 200,000 Irish did not riot; there were no more than several hundred violent rioters many of whom were young boys. City authorities failed to initially contain the mayhem because virtually of New York City’s self-defense militia had been sent to defend Pennsylvania from the Confederate invasion of 1863. The Times’ Bob Herbert was responsible for one of the most egregious draft riot calumnies when he blamed the rioting on Irish immigrants who refused to fight to free poor blacks. In fact, New York City troops, many of whom were Irish and German immigrants, fought valiantly throughout the Civil War. Only a week before the riots, New York City units including Irish and German immigrants played a prominent role in defeating the Confederates at Gettysburg The commander of the Union Army at Gettysburg, George Gordon Meade, and his chief lieutenant General John Reynolds were Irish Americans. To date, The Times had refused to acknowledge, correct or apologize for these calumnies. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 68.3.44.12 (talk) 20:30, 9 November 2015 (UTC)

Not sure you fully understood what I was saying. I'm not doubting the existence of anti-Irish slurs in the Times. Rather, I'm just suggesting improvements to the section of the encyclopedia article. For example, the title of the section had "slurs" in it, but then the slurs weren't mentioned in the section. I also wondered if this controversy in particular was significantly more notable than the many other controversies the Times has faced, and if so, the section should actually be expanded to mention the controversy. None of what you mention above is in the article, so the context isn't there. E.g. instead of just mentioning what happened, explain the media backlash etc. that made it significant. Hope others can weigh in. -KaJunl (talk) 00:53, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Also, were you referring to me as a friend of the Times? I'm just a random reader, and no one deleted the entry. -KaJunl (talk) 00:54, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

Ah, I see now. You had added an expansion to the section that was then deleted. Not sure who deleted it, but I don't think it was deleted because of content - rather, it just wasn't written in an encyclopedic style and wasn't entirely neutral point of view. Hopefully someone can take a look and consider rephrasing and reincluding. -KaJunl (talk) 00:56, 16 November 2015 (UTC)

References

1. http://hidden-civil-war.blogspot.com/2014/12/the-society-for-diffusion-of-political.html
2. The Armies of the Streets, p85, p198
3. http://hidden-civil-war.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-great-militia-mobilization-of-june.html
4. http://hidden-civil-war.blogspot.com/2013/08/new-york-citys-passion-play.html
5. http://hidden-civil-war.blogspot.com/2013/11/a-treasure-trove-of-new-york-city.html
6. http://hidden-civil-war.blogspot.com/2013/08/the-norths-greatest-hispanic-general.html

Wolff: The two faces of the Times

http://www.usatoday.com/story/money/columnist/wolff/2016/01/10/wolff-new-york-times-dueling-magazines/78447158/ Ottawahitech (talk) 20:12, 11 January 2016 (UTC)please ping me

External links modified

Hello fellow Wikipedians,

I have just modified 9 external links on The New York Times. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:

• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090122224028/http://www.bloomberg.com:80/apps/news?pid=20601103 to http://www.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601103&sid=ao4vtybp2N50
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20070328181845/http://online.wsj.com:80/public/article/SB117441975619343135-nb3xaCqDA7AjGYGGjWb0pkAVzt8_20080320.html? to http://online.wsj.com/public/article/SB117441975619343135-nb3xaCqDA7AjGYGGjWb0pkAVzt8_20080320.html
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081012062718/http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/09/17/why-the-new-york-times-is-free/ to http://tech.blorge.com/Structure:%20/2007/09/17/why-the-new-york-times-is-free/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20110318175131/http://paidcontent.org:80/article/419-nytimes.com-paywall-picture-about-to-get-much-clearer/ to http://paidcontent.org/article/419-nytimes.com-paywall-picture-about-to-get-much-clearer/
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20081122230358/http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm to http://www.sscnet.ucla.edu/polisci/faculty/groseclose/Media.Bias.8.htm
• Added archive http://web.archive.org/web/20090720050901/http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/abukhalil12312008/ to http://www.pressaction.com/news/weblog/full_article/abukhalil12312008/
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140712135716/http://www.perseusbooksgroup.com/dacapo/book_detail.jsp?isbn=0306801892 to http://www.perseusbooksgroup.com/dacapo/book_detail.jsp?isbn=0306801892
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20140326071329/http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0805-20.htm to http://www.commondreams.org/views05/0805-20.htm
• Added archive https://web.archive.org/web/20130420171236/http://www.nationalreview.com/stuttaford/stuttaford050703.asp to http://www.nationalreview.com/stuttaford/stuttaford050703.asp

When you have finished reviewing my changes, please set the checked parameter below to true or failed to let others know (documentation at {{Sourcecheck}}).

Y An editor has reviewed this edit and fixed any errors that were found.

• If you have discovered URLs which were erroneously considered dead by the bot, you can report them with this tool.
• If you found an error with any archives or the URLs themselves, you can fix them with this tool.

Cheers.—_{Talk to my owner:Online} 09:11, 31 May 2016 (UTC)

Is four weeks' suspension enough?

With repeated mistakes or biased attempts that were largely unexplained, it seems The New York Times' Twitter account needs to take leaf from its own social media policy and hence, take appropriate action as they did before when the perpetrator was a freelance journalist: http://www.dailysabah.com/readers-corner/2016/08/29/is-four-weeks-suspension-enough — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.74.186.109 (talk) 07:41, 29 August 2016 (UTC)

Inaccuracy perfected.

Public editors They "investigate matters of journalistic integrity" and serve a two-year term (Margaret M. Sullivan served a four- year term, which is the only exception).

Daniel Okrent (2003-2005) was appointed as the first public editor because of the Jayson Blair affair.

Byron Calame (2005-2007)

Clark Hoyt (2007-2010) served an extra year

Arthur S. Brisbane (2010-2012)

Margaret M. Sullivan (2012-2016 ) Elizabeth Spayd (2016-)

States the current article. So the only exception, apart from the only exception, exists. AnnaComnemna (talk) 10:10, 2 October 2016 (UTC)

Support for Kurdistan Workers' Party

Hi, I would like to add the below criticism in the pertinent section following the paper's latest manipulation in a series of articles turning a blind eye, even supporting the activities of Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK):

On December 24, 2016, the New York Times published an article and photo which drew a strong reaction from Turkish social media users who critisized it for publishing a photo of a building attacked by the Kurdistan Workers' Party (PKK) but depicting it as if it were bombed by Turkish security forces. Nordland, Rod (December 24, 2016). "NY Times, HRW's manipulation with PKK article attracts major reaction". Daily Sabah. {{cite web}}: Italic or bold markup not allowed in: |publisher= (help)

Any suggestions or help would be greatly appreciated? Thanks. -213.74.186.109 (talk) 10:22, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, here are two suggestions. First, run a spell check before posting. Second, read WP:SOAPBOX. Rivertorch_WATER 12:47, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

Thanks, but I do not sense any sincerity in your response since according to your argument all the other criticisms should be excluded from the article as well:

   7.1 Failure to report famine in Ukraine
   7.2 Fashion news articles promoting advertisers
   7.3 Plagiarism
   7.4 Duke University lacrosse case
   7.5 Quotes out of context
   7.6 Delayed publication of 2005 NSA warrantless surveillance story
   7.7 Irish student controversy
   7.8 Nail salon series
   7.9 Hiring practices

-213.74.186.109 (talk) 06:45, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

Yes, user 213.74.186.109 should really follow the suggestions of user Rivertorch. In addition I prepared some arguments, why this text should not be added.

Ah, if it is not my favorite critic and stalker on wikipedia 2003:77:4F17:B139:A5D7:4EAA:9809:8EAB. You will find my answers to your biased points below.

1) This incident is not relevant enough to be included in the article about NYT.

Please see my above reply to Rivertorch.

2) This NYT article is mainly about the Turkish war crimes and human rights violations in the Kurdish regions in Turkey, specifically the Sur municipality of Diyarbakir, and not about support for the PKK.

This NYT article is mainly about manipulating the news to push NYT's own editorial views, and adding a bit of salt and pepper with so-called human rights violations when even HRW retracted their statement and photo. Hence it belongs in the criticism section.

3) It is without question that residential neighborhoods in this town were bombed by Turkish security forces. If it were true that for this photo not the Turkish security forces were the perpetrator, it would be no problem to replace this photo by a photo showing destruction for which Turkish security forces are the perpetrator without any question. A possibly careless choice of the photo is not that important.

Of course, if residential areas are full of terrorists then they will be bombed. Remember collateral damage. This photo is of a building bombed by the PKK.

4) The other reference is from Daily Sabah, which is propaganda of the Turkish AKP regime and in general not reliable.

The Daily Sabah is not associated with the Turkish government. But I willl let you know that ANF, ARA News, and the likes belong to a failed attempt at dividing up Syria and belong to a propaganda machine called the PYD, affiliates of the PKK. Please do not confuse the news outlets of a legitimate government with those of a terror network.

5) The "strong reaction from Turkish social media users" might have been caused by Turkish propaganda, so it is probably more related to wikipedia articles about press freedom in Turkey than to the article about the NYT.

"Might have been" is no excuse. Please feel free to add it to articles about press freedom in Turkey.

In any case the above mentioned NYT article should be included elsewhere on wikipedia, in articles about the recent Turkish war crimes and human rights violations in Turkey, as reference.

You obviously have a grudge against Turkey and keep pointing the finger at others with the repetitive old POV pushing card. Get over it already.

2003:77:4F17:B139:A5D7:4EAA:9809:8EAB (talk) 12:57, 27 December 2016 (UTC)

I am not satisfied with your partial answer. Still waiting for an honest discussion. -213.74.186.109 (talk) 06:45, 28 December 2016 (UTC)

• Misplaced Pages good articles
• Social sciences and society good articles
• All unassessed articles
• GA-Class Brands articles
• High-importance Brands articles
• WikiProject Brands articles
• GA-Class Freedom of speech articles
• Mid-importance Freedom of speech articles
• GA-Class Journalism articles
• Top-importance Journalism articles
• WikiProject Journalism articles
• GA-Class New York City articles
• High-importance New York City articles
• WikiProject New York City articles
• Unassessed Media articles
• Unknown-importance Media articles
• WikiProject Media articles
• Unassessed New York (state) articles
• Unknown-importance New York (state) articles
• Misplaced Pages pages referenced by the press
• Selected anniversaries (September 2004)
• Selected anniversaries (June 2009)
• Selected anniversaries (September 2014)