NYTimes Doing What They Do(lemmy.world)

…and for NO reason, you’ve decided to take it upon yourself to defend the fucking NYT. Why?!? Are you just a Trumper, reveling in their duplicity, or are you a moron?

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

danc4498@lemmy.world

4 points

4 months ago

If you want to bash the NYT, have at it, but don’t do it with the WRONG STORY. That just makes you and everybody with similar opinions (which likely includes me) look dumb. And it makes the NYT look right; completely undermining whatever your goal was.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

UrPartnerInCrime@sh.itjust.works

2 points

4 months ago

What does cool to Biden mean to you? Cause to me it sounds like they’re losing interest in him. Which is what the NYT was wanting it seems

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

danc4498@lemmy.world

2 points

4 months ago

Yeah, that’s exactly what the article is about. And the subtitle perfectly summarized it. Biden has done a lot for black farmers in Georgia, and white farmers have successfully blocked all that. And despite the fact that the white farmers have blocked it, Biden is taking taking the blame. That is what the NYT article is reporting on.

The guy I’m responding to said the headline was “black farmers are mad at Biden”. Which isn’t even to the same thing.

I think this meme is trying to say that the NYT is pushing a narrative that Biden should be blamed for this. But that’s not what the article is about. It is about the fact that Biden IS being blamed for this and that is unfair.

And if you are Biden, it’s important to know that your messaging on this specific issue has failed so far and you need to make sure that black farmers in Georgia know who exactly to blame.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

Hamartia@lemmy.world

1 point

4 months ago

They perceive that the article is bad for Biden so are attacking it. The reason it is bad for Biden is that it takes an albeit true story and frames it in the only possible negative way for him. Now that framing is still true but as far as that story goes it is weak and unnatural. As far as slights go it is a very weak attack. The fear is not that the piece will land a mortal blow but in the aggregate.

This isn’t an easy piece to slap down as it is objectively ‘true’ and the barb is nuanced enough to be missed by a disinterested reader (the target audience for both the article and its rebuttal).

For the sake of mirroring the low-concept appetite of the disinterested reader they wish to reach, they have decided (seems automatic tbh) to go with a low-concept rebuttal. So they spin the story in such a way as to subtract its nuance so that the intent is easier to spot. In effect it is a strawman. Which to an interested reader, such as yourself, is counterproductive as the lie is obvious and unnecessary.

permalink

report

parent

[ - ]

danc4498@lemmy.world

1 point

4 months ago

It’s a problem to call this article “framing”. This article is a “political analysis” story. It is not about the bill that Biden signed or the farmers that sued. It is about the political landscape going into the election. As such, there is only one way of analyzing this story. This one.

If I were a part of the Democratic Party, this story would be very informative to me and let me know where I need to better focus my efforts.

If you disagree and only want sunshine and rainbows stories, then fine. As I said before, we have to agree to disagree

permalink

report

parent

Show more comments