Advertisement

Drudge Retort: The Other Side of the News
Friday, June 05, 2020

Seth Meyers on Thursday tore into The New York Times' decision to publish Arkansas Sen. Tom Cotton's controversial essay calling for military force against anti-racism protesters. The "Late Night" comedian described the Republican senator's column as "sinister" and "chilling" but said "the more shocking thing is that the Times opinion page chose to run it."

More

Comments

Admin's note: Participants in this discussion must follow the site's moderation policy. Profanity will be filtered. Abusive conduct is not allowed.

More from the cited article...

...The move comes just hours after Times editorial-page editor James Bennet defended publishing the piece, saying "it would undermine the integrity and independence of the New York Times if we only published views that editors like me agreed with."...

The NYTimes seems to be backing away from the op-ed due to fact-checking concerns (yeah, there were some issues in that area that did go against the NYTimes policy).

On the other hand, sometimes I think it is good to let the extreme Republicans, such as Sen Cotton, expose themselves for the analpores they are.

#1 | Posted by LampLighter at 2020-06-04 10:18 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

While it can be argued that nuts like Cotton should be allowed to display their tin foil hattedness, to do so without an opposing piece is unconscionable.

#2 | Posted by prius04 at 2020-06-05 10:17 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"Surreal and horrifying to wake up on the morning of June 4 - the 31st anniversary of the Tiananmen Square crackdown - to this headline."

@Amy Qin - China correspondent for The New York Times

#3 | Posted by Hagbard_Celine at 2020-06-05 10:21 AM | Reply

People are defending the NYT as a form of free speech or as a form of letting the opposition speak. Let me ask one question....

Should Jeffery Dahmer be allowed to run a recipe piece? I think everyone would say of course not..

OK, that establishes the notion that the NYT should not run just anything but should be judicious in what they run. Now we only differ on where to draw the line.

Thus, people who support running the Cotton Op Ed are telling us their opinions on where they would draw the line.

My point here is that people are suggesting that the NYT should not be even drawing that line, but the Dahmer example shows that that is not true. We all DO agree there needs to be a line. So please stop making this an argument over censorship. It is not. It's about WHERE to draw the line. And this op ed crossed that line.

#4 | Posted by prius04 at 2020-06-05 10:22 AM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

Not for an authoritarian dictator it isn't too far at all.

Humpy is our Dictator in Chief.

Better known as a DIC.

#5 | Posted by donnerboy at 2020-06-05 10:50 AM | Reply

The NYT really made an effort to recruit conservative thinkers.

In doing so, they give those ideas the benefit of the reputation of the NYT.

#6 | Posted by BruceBanner at 2020-06-05 12:10 PM | Reply

"In doing so, they give those ideas the benefit of the reputation of the NYT." Was that intentionally intended to be funny or merely ironic?

#7 | Posted by visitor_ at 2020-06-05 12:35 PM | Reply

People are defending the NYT as a form of free speech

Do those people know that freedom of speech does not apply to private corporations like the New York Times?

#8 | Posted by JOE at 2020-06-05 12:44 PM | Reply

Yeah. This was a questionable editorial decision. Having a counterpoint oped would have been appropriate.

#9 | Posted by moder8 at 2020-06-05 01:15 PM | Reply | Newsworthy 1

"In doing so, they give those ideas the benefit of the reputation of the NYT." Was that intentionally intended to be funny or merely ironic?

#7 | POSTED BY VISITOR_

We get it: If it's not Fox News or Trump's Twitter, it's Fake News to you.

#10 | Posted by Sycophant at 2020-06-05 01:34 PM | Reply

I bet that Jeffrey Dahmer recipe would be finger eatin lickin' good

#11 | Posted by LostAngeles at 2020-06-05 02:30 PM | Reply

"Having a counterpoint oped would have been appropriate.

#9 | POSTED BY MODER8"

Except that they didn't cite a lack of a counterpoint as the problem. They cited 'fact-checking concerns' yet didn't point out anything in the op-ed that was factually wrong.

#12 | Posted by rjm53 at 2020-06-06 11:47 AM | Reply

Comments are closed for this entry.

Home | Breaking News | Comments | User Blogs | Stats | Back Page | RSS Feed | RSS Spec | DMCA Compliance | Privacy | Copyright 2020 World Readable

Drudge Retort