I’m starting a thread for news on mounting media layoffs as well as criticism of the media and journalism. Stuff that doesn’t necessarily or directly touch on politics.

 

Dire warnings after BuzzFeed laid off 15 percent of their workforce:

 

 

 

 

I am glad Palmieri called her out. Jordan has been clashing with Jarvis and others online for days over her bias and roots.

It's that time again. The Beltway doing what they do best - chastising any Democratic voters who have any hope (they never ever do that with Republicans).

And the New Yorker, which I believe had the infamous cover of "black power" Michelle and Barack Obama, dishes out an incredibly degrading cover to humiliate the Democrats.

They're already doing their best to engineer a backlash against the party - they must be very upset.

1 hour ago, DRW50 said:

They're already doing their best to engineer a backlash against the party - they must be very upset.

It's not working. And I don't actually think that Kamala cover was meant to be degrading, but it is definitely tacky and stupid.

Fox News' The Five is taking the rise of Harris well - note the one woman who tries to speak sense. You can tell the men are worried.

 

Edited July 29, 20241 yr by Vee

2 hours ago, DRW50 said:

It's that time again. The Beltway doing what they do best - chastising any Democratic voters who have any hope (they never ever do that with Republicans).

And the New Yorker, which I believe had the infamous cover of "black power" Michelle and Barack Obama, dishes out an incredibly degrading cover to humiliate the Democrats.

They're already doing their best to engineer a backlash against the party - they must be very upset.

for the record, that’s new york magazine, not the new yorker. 

here’s the new yorker’s current cover:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine

 

re trump’s ‘won’t have to vote’ comment: there’s was a time when something like that would have been met with a 40-point headline and editorials from major publications expressing outrage. 

instead: 

 

To the Editor:

“Trump Tells Christians, Vote ‘Just This Time’” (news article, July 29) contained critical information about the threat that Donald Trump poses to our democracy.

Mr. Trump’s quoted statement was an admission that his plan is to subvert the democratic process and lead our country into authoritarianism: “Christians, get out and vote. Just this time. You won’t have to do it anymore, you know what? Four more years, it’ll be fixed, it’ll be fine, you won’t have to vote anymore, my beautiful Christians.”

The reporting was clear, concise and easy for any reader to understand. Unfortunately, this article was buried on Page A15 of your newspaper.

Can I ask, What is more important for a free press to publish on the front page than this direct and clear attack on our democracy by one of our two presidential candidates?

Robin Perls-Shultis
Shokan, N.Y.

 

@wonderwoman1951 Thanks. I'm wary of both publications to be honest.

@Vee I do think some of the efforts at shaming and forcing backlash will work but luckily, they don't have near as much influence as they once did. 

Speaking of Faux News:

 

 

 

More and more, the movie "Network" really shows us how this all will pan out.

17 hours ago, Vee said:

It's not working. And I don't actually think that Kamala cover was meant to be degrading, but it is definitely tacky and stupid.

It’s definitely degrading in the context in which they have chosen to present this. Anyone who knows the history of how Brown people from islands and the children of Brown people from islands were derisively called coconuts, knows this. I refuse to believe that a periodical as old as New York Magazine would be totally ignorant of this, particularly when they brand themselves as knowledgeable of what goes on globally. And notice the mostly Brown people at the base of the coconut. They know what they’re doing. Just like they knew what they were doing with the Obamas caricature.

Edited July 30, 20241 yr by DramatistDreamer
Correction to New York Magazine

18 hours ago, DRW50 said:

And the New Yorker, which I believe had the infamous cover of "black power" Michelle and Barack Obama, dishes out an incredibly degrading cover to humiliate the Democrats.

 

16 hours ago, wonderwoman1951 said:

for the record, that’s new york magazine, not the new yorker. 

here’s the new yorker’s current cover:

https://www.newyorker.com/magazine

 

34 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

I refuse to believe that a periodical as old as The New Yorker would be totally ignorant 

 

as clarified by @wonderwoman1951, the cover in the tweet is "New York" magazine, which is the same company as "Vulture".
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_(magazine)


"New York" magazine is not "The New Yorker".

Edited July 30, 20241 yr by janea4old

@janea4oldand @wonderwoman1951. I made the correction to my post.
 

Although The New Yorker has had its moments of ableism and mocking disguised as satire, they can’t take the blame this time around. 
I don’t want the point to get lost about why people would be angry about such a cover .These folks know exactly what they’re doing. Maybe people who haven’t lived it won’t understand.

Is this cover for real? What is this? 

 

2 hours ago, DramatistDreamer said:

It’s definitely degrading in the context in which they have chosen to present this. Anyone who knows the history of how Brown people from islands and the children of Brown people from islands were derisively called coconuts, knows this. I refuse to believe that a periodical as old as New York Magazine would be totally ignorant of this, particularly when they brand themselves as knowledgeable of what goes on globally. And notice the mostly Brown people at the base of the coconut. They know what they’re doing. Just like they knew what they were doing with the Obamas caricature.

 

25 minutes ago, DramatistDreamer said:

I made the correction to my post.

I don’t want the point to get lost about why people would be angry about such a cover. These folks know exactly what they’re doing. Maybe people who haven’t lived it won’t understand.

Thank you for bringing the point back, and for posting the implications, some of which I had been unaware until I read your post.

Edited July 30, 20241 yr by janea4old