This thread is meant to chronicle the death of traditional media and hell, new media too since most of it is just as bad as the old media.
The media put their already shoddy reputations on the line and lost big. They still assumed that as the fourth estate, they had the ability to shape the majority of the minds of the voters. We saw the media outright admit that they feel it was right to do whatever it takes to make sure Trump didn't get elected, we saw the media run with a Russian connection that did not exist, we saw the media take quotes out of context to manufacture controversies, and best of all, we got to see the media deal first hand with the consequences of their actions with an increasingly hostile public, where they pretended that questioning the integrity of the journalist meant that the gas chambers were all fired up and ready to go.
So now we are going to see these old media outlets die off, depend on shady capital injections, and consolidate. While I'm sure The New York Times will exist in 2025, it won't be anything like what it is now, which is a mere shadow of what it was 10, 20, or 50 years ago.
To kick it off, the NYT has been losing subscribers since the election and they issue a shitty mea culpa in hopes to stave off the bleeding.
http://nypost.com/2016/11/11/new-york-times-we-blew-it-on-trump/To our readers,
When the biggest political story of the year reached a dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night, our newsroom turned on a dime and did what it has done for nearly two years — cover the 2016 election with agility and creativity.
After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?
As we reflect on this week’s momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. We believe we reported on both candidates fairly during the presidential campaign. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.
We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our subscribers. We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.
Sincerely,
Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr.
Publisher
Dean Baquet
Executive Editor
Having attended a few Trump rallies, NYT reporters were at every single one. So they knew all about the rallies and they knew about his support. Instead, they kikefully tried to twist and manipulate it, from not even mentioning the size of his yuge rallies to ridiculing the people who attended the rallies to just outright lying about the support he was getting. They doctored and oversampled the polls in hopes that it would depress Republican turnout and craft the narrative that it was all over for Hillary. NYT was at the forefront of this, they knew about the support he was getting, and decided to go ahead and lie anyway. Now they are losing subscribers:
Citing reader anger over election coverage, Rutenberg wrote that, “Most ominously, it came in the form of canceled subscriptions.”
You reap what you sow. You wanted to be a propaganda organ for the Democrats, you got to live with the consequences.
