nyt and cnn publicly defame people entire societies still not being sued

[KingScorpio]

https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/09/opinion/meghan-markle-prince-harry.html

new york times deffamed entire british society for racism and no one is suing it in the hundreds of millions,

like the sanders catholic high school student case that is still dealing with a 275 million suing at cnn.

regards

[BIT-BENDER]

News outlets are over exercising there power and some are in some cases known to be covering the truth -or maybe some of the truth-
Some of this news outlets gets sued but very often escape getting touched

[TwitchySeal]

That's an op-ed, not a news article.  It's not written by a NYTimes journalist and does not reflect the stance of the NYTimes in any way.

It's literally just the opinion of a single person, which is why it says 'Opinon' at the very top,  in this case that person is Afua Hirs.

[TECSHARE]

That's an op-ed.  It's not written by a NYTimes journalist and does not reflect the stance of the NYTimes in any way.

It's literally just the opinion of a single person.  In this case, Afua Hirsch.

Interesting you don't feel the need to apply this same standard to Zero hedge. It is almost as if you are seeking to confirm your bias...

[TwitchySeal]

That's an op-ed.  It's not written by a NYTimes journalist and does not reflect the stance of the NYTimes in any way.

It's literally just the opinion of a single person.  In this case, Afua Hirsch.

Interesting you don't feel the need to apply this same standard to Zero hedge. It is almost as if you are seeking to confirm your bias...

Zero hedge is a finance/alt-right blog (mostly written by the same guy, but it may be more than one guy, but we're not sure who's actually writing it because they all just post under the same pseudonym).  The problem I have with them is they write all their blog posts as if they are news articles and the opinion is only from one point of view.

The NYTimes prints opinions for many points of views.  It's not uncommon for them to have dueling op-eds right next to each other with completely different opinions on the same subject. 

[msarro]

These media houses consider themselves as part of power pillars in every country. They make and break governments that's why even governments are afraid of them. You need to be a powerful guy like them to sue them else they will wipe you out.

[TwitchySeal]

These media houses consider themselves as part of power pillars in every country. They make and break governments that's why even governments are afraid of them. You need to be a powerful guy like them to sue them else they will wipe you out.

Democracy dies in darkness.

Without journalism, all we have is propaganda.

Other peoples opinions are important also though.  But don't confuse that with journalism.

[TECSHARE]

That's an op-ed.  It's not written by a NYTimes journalist and does not reflect the stance of the NYTimes in any way.

It's literally just the opinion of a single person.  In this case, Afua Hirsch.

Interesting you don't feel the need to apply this same standard to Zero hedge. It is almost as if you are seeking to confirm your bias...

Zero hedge is a finance/alt-right blog (mostly written by the same guy, but it may be more than one guy, but we're not sure who's actually writing it because they all just post under the same pseudonym).  The problem I have with them is they write all their blog posts as if they are news articles and the opinion is only from one point of view.

The NYTimes prints opinions for many points of views.  It's not uncommon for them to have dueling op-eds right next to each other with completely different opinions on the same subject.

For about the 100th time it is mostly an aggregator site using mainstream references, but don't let that get in the way of confirming your bias. So what is wrong with it being focused on finance? Yes, yes, the opinions you support are valid and the opinions which disagree are conspiracy/alt-right. How many points of view should one author have? What you are describing in the NY Times is not "different opinions" it is called  "controlled opposition" where people like you desperate to confirm your bias use it to pretend you are rounding out your view points.

Democracy dies in darkness.

[regurgitates The Washington Post's slogan] [Remembers all articles there are behind a paywall]

[KingScorpio]

That's an op-ed, not a news article.  It's not written by a NYTimes journalist and does not reflect the stance of the NYTimes in any way.

It's literally just the opinion of a single person, which is why it says 'Opinon' at the very top,  in this case that person is Afua Hirs.

nyt has published it and defamed brits as racists, they should pay several hundred millions for that.

time these jackass media gets punished.

[KingScorpio]

That's an op-ed.  It's not written by a NYTimes journalist and does not reflect the stance of the NYTimes in any way.

It's literally just the opinion of a single person.  In this case, Afua Hirsch.

Interesting you don't feel the need to apply this same standard to Zero hedge. It is almost as if you are seeking to confirm your bias...

Zero hedge is a finance/alt-right blog (mostly written by the same guy, but it may be more than one guy, but we're not sure who's actually writing it because they all just post under the same pseudonym).  The problem I have with them is they write all their blog posts as if they are news articles and the opinion is only from one point of view.

The NYTimes prints opinions for many points of views.  It's not uncommon for them to have dueling op-eds right next to each other with completely different opinions on the same subject.  

there never was true democracy money ruled the world.

true democracy is not possible

[TheCoinGrabber]

There was no racism. Mackerel was just an ass. No wonder the family dislike her. Pretty much everyone predicted this would happen when they married. She's gonna dump Harry so bad for that divorce money I wouldn't be surprised if she gets Diana'd.

On the plus side, that's more juicy bits for these "media" outlets to talk about.

Democracy dies in darkness.

Without journalism, all we have is propaganda.

Other peoples opinions are important also though.  But don't confuse that with journalism.

The problem is that the line between journalism and propaganda these days seem to be non-existent. I still remember that video of CNN staff arranging people to make it appear that there were more in that "vigil". And these media companies are unapologetic about wrongdoings like this. They seriously believe they know better and what they believe is what people should be told.

[msarro]

These media houses consider themselves as part of power pillars in every country. They make and break governments that's why even governments are afraid of them. You need to be a powerful guy like them to sue them else they will wipe you out.

Democracy dies in darkness.

Without journalism, all we have is propaganda.

Other peoples opinions are important also though.  But don't confuse that with journalism.

Anything that has no check tries to more harm then good. With advent of internet these media houses are taking it all over and irony is that when someone tries to stop them they start making noise that free journalism is being attacked. They dont want to get legislative rather remain free from all sort of accountability.

[KingScorpio]

leftist american media could get wiped out due to anti defamtion lawsuits

completely without state interference

[franky1]

the thing i hate about media when they just aggregate stories or just do opinion pieces is that they have no editorial integrity. they just let anything print as long as it clickbaits people in.

true journalism should be a reporter writes a story and then that story gets fact checked.
its kind of like law. in the UK there is the crown prosecution which fact checks accusations and see's if there is any merit in taking it further
in america there is a district attorney

media have lost their spine and removed the editorial/fact checking ability they once had. and it makes me even more sad when i see tv news media just repeat the same teleprompted stories word for word without even knowing/caring about what they are saying
https://youtu.be/TM8L7bdwVaA?t=20
https://youtu.be/6PlTDeTrELk?t=23
https://youtu.be/dAkxR9T01pw?t=16

[audaciousbeing]

That's an op-ed, not a news article.  It's not written by a NYTimes journalist and does not reflect the stance of the NYTimes in any way.

It's literally just the opinion of a single person, which is why it says 'Opinon' at the very top,  in this case that person is Afua Hirs.

It does not matter if its not their opinion. Its on their platform and they are aware of it but because they know that such sentimental article would generate interest from every quarters thereby increasing their own visits and clicks, it does not matter and its enough for them to hide under the disclaimer that they are not responsible for the opinions of their users. NYTs website is not a forum that they are likely to be absolved from such irresponsibility.

When the news broke, I know its just a matter of time before some reacted to it and begin to make some conjectures all over the place. The problem is not even about the Prince and Meghan but the number of people that would not allow those innocent people to lead their lives in peace without connoting some emotions and thereby increasing emotions here and there.

[ProtonBlast]

CNN just settled with that MAGA hat kid who sued for $275,000,000. https://pjmedia.com/trending/cnn-settles-with-maga-hat-kid-nick-sandmann/

This is a good thing, though I don't think someone should even thousands of dollars for what they went through, but CNN should be hurt big time for what they did.