
Why the Left Can't Stand The New York Times - AndrewBissell
https://www.cjr.org/special_report/why-the-left-cant-stand-the-new-york-times.php
======
ergothus
I'm liberal. I'm frequently frustrated and disappointed with the NYT - to the
point that I have elected NOT to subscribe as I do with several other
publications despite consuming only digitally.

However, this article does a very poor job of summarizing my frustrations with
the NYT so often doing little more than repeating the arguments of both sides
without validation or investigation. It mentions "non-newsworthy articles",
but, in NYT-style, does little to prove the claim beyond offering two
anecdotes.

I suppose this article DOES explain my frustrations well, by means of example
rather than explanation.

~~~
lidHanteyk
I'm a postmodern neo-Marxist. This article explained my frustrations well,
using explanations. Do you want to explain why you dislike NYT?

"I'm liberal" could mean anything from "I'm classical liberal" to "I'm
metaliberal" with anything in-between; it only means that you're not an
authoritarian, in the grand scheme of the political compass.

~~~
OrderlyTiamat
> I'm a postmodern neo-Marxist

I have never seen a self proclaimed postmodern neomarxist. You're the bogeyman
for the alt light, an impossible oxymoron, the eternal devil.

I've heard lots about various liberals, but what does a self proclaimed
postmodern neo-marxist believe?

Do you believe all society is power struggle, and that language is the primary
means by which this fight is won? Do you see gender and race as the new
classes in the marxist analysis? Do you think that all discourse is ultimately
about power, and not the truth?

Seriously, I've heard many, many things about the postmodern neo-marxist, most
of them self contradictory. I've never heard from a self proclaimed post
modern neo-marxist. How would you describe yourself?

~~~
lidHanteyk
Short version: Obviously there's no single overarching metanarrative which
ties together all of reality into one objective whole. _But_ , also, Marx's
line of thought is still extremely relevant to our current power structures
and money systems.

Here's an open secret: Power is nothing more nor less than the dual of
responsibility. All society is a struggle to manage responsibilities and
power, not just power; as we build social constructions, we weigh the dual
problems of ensuring that people will fulfill their responsibilities as well
as not abuse their powers.

Language is interesting. A century of postmodern mathematics has demolished
any hope that language is meaningful on its own. Instead, we see that language
is the medium by which humans convince other humans to do things; it is a
medium of responsibility and power. When a person says to another, "I see a
cat," they are asking their partner to alter their worldview such that they
are cognizant of a hypothesized cat which was not a feature of their
subjective outlook.

Race and gender are interesting mostly because people are so stupid about
them. Marx couldn't have known; science has marched on. At this point,
gender's basically done; the closest we have to gender is the idea that people
play symbol-games with each other in order to indicate mating preferences. If
we include the fact that some 2% of people are intersex, then gender really
goes into the bin along with all gendered language.

Similarly, race cannot withstand the basic mathematics of pedigree collapse
and genetic mixing. It's gotten to the point where the self-aware racists have
to call themselves "race realists" \-- they _know_ that they have nothing if
science cannot back up their claims of the existence of races. As we shift to
phenotype-oriented thinking, ethnic ancestry stops being culturally important.

Discourse can't be about the truth, because of Tarski's Undefinability of
Truth. I think that Hofstadter's closest to the right mark, and that discourse
is about perspective. To the extent that discourse is about esteem, it's also
about respect. To the extent that discourse is about power, it's also about
responsibility.

I would describe myself as a straightforward metaliberal rationalist, an anti-
fascist, an examiner of evidence and possibilities.

Edit: You know _why_ alt-right folks dislike this so much? It's because they
cannot stand it when people are straightforward and honest about the ambiguity
and nuances in our society, and they _hate_ when people are well-read and
well-considered.

------
FillardMillmore
The writer brings up a good point at the end: is it time for some kind of
media watchdog? How could such a thing be funded and set up without any
conflicts of interest?

The Times does have its problems but so do many other news outlets today. With
the impeachment proceedings currently happening, its become more apparent.
Journalists write half-baked reports or stories that are simply not true,
regardless of their political biases. Of course, the next day, they'll issue
corrections to these stories but as the saying goes: "A lie travels halfway
round the world before the truth straps on its boots". These journalists are
in constant competition to get the story out before others and the quality and
integrity of the journalism sometimes suffers because of this - to get the
story out faster, they will fail to follow all the threads and verify that the
information they have is actually true. Not to mention, though corrections are
issued when errors occur, they don't have to give any of the advertising money
back - this to me seems like a set of bad incentives.

------
chkaloon
I agree that the FT is a great publication, exactly for the reasons in here. I
also have the impression, however, that the paper version is better than the
online version. I find myself spending much more time picking through the
"bones" of the paper version, where I will just skim the online version. I
haven't actually checked if there is a difference in reporting; maybe it's
only an aesthetic thing?

------
RickJWagner
As a conservative, I found this article interesting and surprising.

I've heard the political spectrum is really a circle-- if you go far enough
right (or left) you end up at the other end of the spectrum. To me, it's now a
little more credible.

------
mrxd
So good and brilliant. I'm a huge fan of Amber A’Lee Frost.

------
ydnaclementine
> throw the whole thing in the garbage with contempt

at least recycle it!

------
s0l1dsnak3123
It's great to see some positive left representation at HN. There's a lot of
very neoliberal or libertarian politics going on in the comments round here,
but I don't see so much of a socialist bent. I hope this changes!

~~~
lordlic
Unfortunately it seems that the anti-socialist sentiment is so strong that
even a friendly and positive comment like this gets downvoted into light-grey
oblivion.

