It was quite a day for anonymice.
The lead article in the Thursday Styles section, about the supposed news that Uber and Lyft have put a damper on the sex that used to take place in the backseats of New York City taxis, includes the following attributions:
Then the foreign section has an account of a stabbing attack on the American ambassador in South Korea:
It's actually hard to tell which is the New York Times staff editorial about Prime Minister Netanyahu's speech to Congress and which is the op-ed piece from the Iranian ambassador to the United Nations, which may be one of the reasons that a new effort is under way to get Jewish groups to stop subsidizing this sort of thing by buying full-page advertisements in the Times.
The lead news article in Sunday's New York Times appeared under the headline, "G.O.P. Race Starts in Lavish Haunts of Rich Donors." It began:
There are at least two problems with this story.
The first is that one person I know who attended the meeting paid $532 for his room at the Breakers. There was a block rate for Club for Growth people that the Times doesn't mention.
From a book review by Times book critic Dwight Garner that the Times issued this week: "Kinky details are allowed to crawl in. Mr. Christgau says he masturbated when young to the Song of Solomon (the Bible book, not the Toni Morrison novel)."
It seems a bit hypocritical of Mr. Garner to criticize the book author, Robert Christgau, for allowing such details to crawl in, when Mr. Garner himself specializes in including them in his own reviews.
A post here back in September enumerated at least five previous instances in the past four years in which Mr. Garner wrote about masturbation. Smartertimes observed then:
The headline at the top of the New York Times home page was "When the best sex is extramarital."
It leads to an article by "Lawrence Josephs, a psychotherapist in private practice in New York," that says at the bottom, "Details have been altered to protect patient privacy."
Which details have "been altered" and which are true? And where is the line between what is a "detail" and what is more significant than a detail? The Times doesn't provide readers any guidance on either front, and it doesn't even let us in on the question of whether any Times editors are in on the question of what is real and what is altered details.
Reason's Matt Welch does a really nice job of catching the New York Times fretting that Cuba's opening to the U.S. will increase income inequality in Cuba. (Link via Walter Olson.)
And a Times column by Ginia Bellafante about climate change somehow manages to make that story, too, about inequality:
"As Dynasty's Son, Jeb Bush Used His Connections Freely," is the headline on a front-page news article in Sunday's Times. Now there's a story so scandalous and important that maybe the Times should have assigned it to be written by its own publisher, a guy named Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr.
"Such coalition building made Obama the first urban president in more than a century," David Gergen, a professor at Harvard's Kennedy School of Government, writes in a Times review of David Axelrod's book Believer: My Forty Years In Politics.
I can't figure out what Professor Gergen means. John Kennedy, for whom the school at which Mr. Gergen teaches is named, voted from a Boston apartment address and lived in Washington, D.C.'s Georgetown neighborhood. George H.W. Bush's residence was within the city of Houston, Texas, and when he was Reagan's vice president he lived in Washington, D.C. Do Boston, Houston, and Washington not count as "urban' in Professor Gergen's definition? If so, it sure is an idiosyncratic definition.
Today's New York Times carries a correction on Paul Krugman's previous column: " Paul Krugman's column on Monday incorrectly described bookmakers' odds that Greece will exit the eurozone. The odds were worse than even, not better than even."
It looks like today's Krugman column will also require a correction. He writes, "Jeb Bush appears to be getting his economic agenda, such as it is, from the George W. Bush Institute's 4% Growth Project. And the head of that project, Amity Shlaes, is a prominent 'inflation truther,' someone who claims that the government is greatly understating the true rate of inflation."
In fact Miss Shlaes has not been employed by the Bush Institute, much less the "head" of any project there, for at least some months.
A Times news article from Boston reports:
For an example of bad journalism, check out this passage from the page one article by Amy Chozick in Sunday's Times about Hillary Clinton's economic policy:
The Times Home and Garden section has an interview with an architect who designed a fancy chicken coop for a residence in the Hamptons. The architect says:
The Times doesn't challenge that claim. But two chicken farmers I know say that while some heat may be necessary to make sure the chickens' drinking water doesn't freeze, the chickens themselves don't need heat. They are birds, after all. The Times suspends its usual concern with global climate change and excessive energy consumption when it's an architect-designed chicken coop in the Hamptons that is being heated.
A New York Times business section article by Rachel Abrams about Lands' End reports, "If you bought an item from Lands' End recently, you probably did so in Sears. At the beginning of last year, 274 Lands' End shops were inside the retail giant, while Lands' End operated just 16 of its own stores."
This is inaccurate. In fact, if you bought an item from Lands' End recently, you probably did so not in a Sears, but from your computer at your home or office. This is especially true of New York Times readers, who are probably more likely to be Internet users and less likely to be Sears shoppers than the overall population. But it's true overall; according to a recent Land's End SEC filing, "Online sales represented approximately 80% of our U.S. consumer revenue in 2013, up from approximately 20% in 2002."
Disclosure: I own shares of Sears Holdings, the parent company of Sears.
That is quite an editor's note that Joe Nocera's column about Sheldon Silver was saddled with, with the note asserting that the column "was premised on several factual errors." This comes less than a year after a Times public editor column took Mr. Nocera to task for another column about which Warren Buffett said "the whole column is based on an incorrect fact — one that could have been easily checked, but wasn't."
The New York Sun has a characteristically shrewd editorial pointing out further that the Times "editor's note" compounds the error by reporting inaccurately that Mr. Silver has been indicted, when in fact that has not happened.
"Just Kids" is the headline on a New York Times "T" magazine photo spread featuring a model on her back on a half-bare mattress on the floor. The text with the picture asserts that "virginal white lace paired with leather and suede evokes the sexy decadence..." The clothing on the model — a $7,900 Tom Ford jacket and $5,500 skirt, and a $1,725 Givenchy bodysuit — costs $15,125, which seems like a lot of money for "kids," even those attempting to evoke sexy decadence. The Times photo shoot seems to have involved not only a model, a photographer, and a stylist but also a hairdresser, a makeup artist, a manicurist, three photographer's assistants, a stylist's assistant, and a hair assistant, or a total of at least 11 people, all of whom are credited by name in the Times.
Subscribe to the Mailing List
© 2015 FutureOfCapitalism LLC