‘Paper of record’ explains why it’s ignoring blockbuster story.
WND: A New York Times reporter explained why the paper joined nearly every major media outlet in ignoring the blockbuster special counsel charge that Hillary Clinton’s campaign spied on internet traffic at Trump Tower, Donald Trump’s New York City apartment and the White House in an effort to frame Trump as a Russia stooge.
The accusations filed in motions by special counsel John Durham in his investigation of the Obama administration’s Russia probe essentially are too much work for Times readers to digest, wrote Charlie Savage, who covers national security and legal policy issues.
Two days after the story broke, Savage said Durham’s claims “tend to involve dense and obscure issues, so dissecting them requires asking readers to expend significant mental energy and time — raising the question of whether news outlets should even cover such claims.”
He went on to lament that “Trump allies portray the news media as engaged in a cover-up if they don’t.” more here
“too much work for Times readers to digest”
That says a lot about their readers.
Probably the ones that are alone in their car with a mask on.
COVID must be able to travel 60mph and infect them on a drive by.
Maybe they should do it cartoon style. You know, with illustrations and dialogue balloons so the idiots know who says what.
Decades of dumbing down your content will do that.
Charlie Savage can’t get such “dense and obscure issues” clear in his own head and so assumes nobody else can either. Because he’s smarter than anybody else, right Charlie? Meaning this is yet another instance of psychological projection.
It’s either that or he’s making lying excuses for toeing the prog establishment propaganda line. Upon brief reflection, it’s more likely a combination of the two.
Now that’s something I can believe. Probably same idiots who elected AOC.
Well NYT weenies, do you happen to recall that breaking down complex matters IS YOUR FXNG JOB?
Just return your salary, and then the subscription income to your simpleton customers.
Perhaps you should try sock puppets.
Not sure who the biggest moron is in that picture.
I’m not surprised that the NYT reporter thinks that the readers are too dense to understand what’s going on, just look at what they keep voting into office in the state.
remember ‘life of julia?’
they can dumb it down, and probably will, to protect the treasonists
Translation: dirt people your pea brains are so small you couldn’t possibly comprehend how evil Hellery Clinton is.
““It’s our job to tell you what to think.””
“BRZEZINSKI: “Well, I think that the dangerous, you know, edges here are that he is trying to undermine the media and trying to make up his own facts. And it could be that while unemployment and the economy worsens, he could have undermined the messaging so much that he can actually control exactly what people think. And that, that is our job.”
https://www.louderwithcrowder.com/mika-slips-job-tell-think
kill your TV
Translation: Our reporters are too dumb to do anything but repeat leftist propaganda.
I see the DNC has not told the Times staff what to publish.
if the NYT actually runs the story correctly, they’ll implicate themselves as being compliant and in collusion
media, entertainment, sports, educashon, pharma, etc. went all in, acted accordingly, and KNOWINGLY lied on a massive scale
…It IS hard for their readers to understand, since they only have literal bird brains, plus the bars on the bottom of the cage and the poop splatters and spilled seed cover some of the letters up randomly…
There you go, their readers are only able to read at a 3rd grade level of comprehension!
Uhh… connect the dots? Isn’t that an activity little kids do? Improve fine motor skills and all? Help them get ready for writing? There might be a lot of dots but the thing isn’t obscure at all… unless you want it to be.
The confirmation of criminality in the Clintoon campaign (and that is what it will be held to) coming out now indicates the democrat party does not want her to run in ’24 and is prepared to ‘make it so’.
So your readers are low IQ idiots?
NYT didn’t get their Feb check from Soros?
HA! I remember the BS mantra in currency when I was in high school that reading the NYT for a year was equivalent to going to college for a semester. Seems like their readers cannot comprehend unless the NYT article is accompanied with lots of pictures. On a serious note, this is such an embarrassing excuse.
Well, I be’s confused … an shit … cum to thik of it, even puttin on my pants confuses me ……… I mena, c’mon man!
Durham’s claims “tend to involve dense and obscure issues.”
Such as, our CHOSEN candidate is a lying psychopath, and we didn’t want to get arkancided!
Since their readership is probably confined to the Northeast metropolises then, sure, those readers are insufficiently familiar with absolute truths or too invested in their previous denial of obvious Clinton corruption to accept the reality that they were wrong and abetted her corruption.
I read the New York Times and are not a dummy. I just don’t want to follow pop bands like Durham Durham.
…it’s also hard for another big NYT consumer to read the articles, since they’re soaked in brine, covered in fish scales, and smell pretty terrible once you get them home…
“Only the News that Fits the Narrative Do We Print.”
Even a bird brain knows enough to shit on this.
When Killary is not offing someone she spends her free time spying on lil Donny boy, how cute.
Duranty worked for the Times?
Yeah…
I knew it!, What an admission of the low intelligence of the average NYT reader! Maybe they should have connect the dots and coloring pages for them. Oh and a lot of pictures!
“The NY Times: We’ll Tell You What To Think”
The NYT never admits to being embarrassed because it never is.
“All The Lies That Are Fit To Print”.
For lies unfit to print, it tells its readers they are too dumb to comprehend them.
So have a New York Post or National Enquirer reader explain it to you…
“N.Y. Times: Hillary spy scandal too hard for our readers to understand”
At last, the NYT says something truthful.
ohso….that must be the same NYTimes which is in chronic circling-the-drain debt from forever until forever lol~