About WaPo and the NYT . . . . .

[Stinky The Clown]

Your opinion of either or both:

A paper that reports the news straight, including stories our side may not like

or

Water carrier for the right

[dalton99a]

1. NYT gave us Iraq.

[Cha]

7. They sure as HELL did.

[Squinch]

2. I switched from the NYT (hometown paper) to the WP. NYT is too often the water carrier.

Their work is important, but they act as if they are afraid of Individual 1's tweets.

And not for nothing, but I'm shocked at how much WSJ is whipping Individual 1's ass.

[berni_mccoy]

3. NYT's gave us Judith Miller of Valerie Plame Scandal and now Maggie Haberman

Who is a mouthpiece for Trump

[Bleacher Creature]

4. This is the NYT in a nutshell.

Link to tweet

[dalton99a]

6. All the rightwing bias that's fit to print

[Hermit-The-Prog]

14. and clouds and shadows

In NYT’s Hillary Clinton Coverage, An Obsession With ‘Clouds’ And ‘Shadows’

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/livewire/new-york-times-cloud-shadow-clinton-coverage

[dalton99a]

15. Oh yeah, that asshole Michael S. Schmidt

[Hermit-The-Prog]

16. NYT is as dead to me as tv "news"

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

5. Both have done some excellent reporting.

In general they've been doing good work - WaPo in particular - and have brought to light a lot of stuff about the Trump admin. I have digital subscriptions to both and read them every day. Some good op-ed writers, too.

[Marie Marie]

8. Unless I am sadly mistaken, haven't both papers broken major stories

critical of Trump over the last 2 years? I remember thinking, as Chris or Rachel or Lawrence prefaced a story with: Breaking news from the NYT or The WaPo, that Trump seems to have finally gotten the press to do their job and investigate rather than just trumpet the Orange one. Are they perfect, of course not but I think they have done some excellent investigative journalism on Trump. JMHO

[mcar]

9. WaPo is better, IMO

NYT does some great reporting, but I will never forgive them for their coverage of HRC. Or their constant "poor misunderstood Trump voters" stories.

[Jarqui]

10. Hit & Miss

Could be worse. Could be better.

Definitely better than right wing crap.

[Hoyt]

11. Lately WP is my favorite, but NYT is still decent, especially their writers who

appear on MSNBC, etc. Unless papers are endorsing the likes of trump, I’m fine with them.

[Midwestern Democrat]

12. Well, they're two of the three best newspapers in the country (the Wall Street Journal is the third

member of that echelon).

[shraby]

13. Judith Miller was then, this is now. They are both doing outstanding reporting on

the rotten pickle this country had found itself in.

They have been breaking news that without them, we may know nothing about otherwise. They dig and find the stories, the talking heads on the t.v. machine on MSNBC AND CNN convey it to the audience that live too far away to get those newspapers.

The newspapers and t.v. news are both working the way they are supposed to. I give them all a big hand!

[RockRaven]

17. NYT is sh*t and does not deserve the moniker "The Paper of Record"

Let me clarify -- their coverage of politics, especially domestic politics, is garbage. It is harmful. It is shameful. Their editorial page is trash, and their editorial decisions are a disgrace. It isn't about rightward slant or bias; it is about craven sucking up to power, and access journalism, and participating in misinformation.

Nice crossword puzzles, most of the time. And they still cover some stuff, like the arts, which other papers don't even try to cover anymore. And they do have some good investigative journalists, just not in the area of national politics.


WaPo is much better for covering national/DC politics. But that's all they are superior at. And they also shamelessly play the access game. Which leads to credulously propagating misinformation disguised as scoops.

[California_Republic]

18. Post

[uponit7771]

19. Wapo more objective