Jump to content

New York Times opinion editor resigns after column controversy as Trump slams paper


Recommended Posts

Posted

New York Times opinion editor resigns after column controversy as Trump slams paper

By Jessica DiNapoli

 

2020-06-07T231808Z_1_LYNXMPEG560RD_RTROPTP_4_USA-TRUMP.JPG

FILE PHOTO: The motorcade of U.S. President-elect Donald Trump makes its way past the New York Times building after a meeting in New York U.S., November 22, 2016. REUTERS/Shannon Stapleton

 

NEW YORK (Reuters) - A New York Times editorial page editor responsible for publishing a column that advocated using the military to quiet protests over U.S. racial inequality resigned from his position on Sunday, the newspaper announced.

 

U.S. President Donald Trump slammed the newspaper in a Tweet after the announcement, saying that "The New York Times is Fake News!!!"

 

The New York Times has come under fire after it published an editorial on June 3 from U.S. Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, titled "Send in the Troops." Cotton wrote that an "overwhelming show of force" would restore order after protests spread across the country, some of which turned violent.

 

The protests for racial justice first erupted 13 days ago after video footage emerged showing George Floyd, a 46-year old unarmed black man in handcuffs, lying face down on a Minneapolis street on May 25 as a white police officer knelt on his neck for nearly nine minutes.

 

"It's past time to support local law enforcement with federal authority," Cotton wrote.

 

Cotton re-tweeted Trump's Tweet calling the paper "Fake News."

 

The editor, James Bennet, will be replaced by Katie Kingsbury. Bennet had been the Editorial Page Editor since 2016. He had helped expand the range of voices the paper published and explore new formats, according to a note publisher A.G. Sulzberger sent to staff.

 

Cotton and Bennet could not be immediately reached for comment.

 

Jim Dao, a deputy in the paper's opinion section who oversees op-eds, is stepping off the masthead to move into a new role in the newsroom, according to the Times.

 

Before joining the New York Times as an editor, Bennet was the editor-in-chief of news magazine The Atlantic. He was in the running for the top job at The New York Times.

 

Earlier in his career, he was a reporter with the New York Times.

 

His resignation comes as newsrooms across the United States examine their own track record with diversity and sensitivity to issues to people of color.

 

On Saturday, the top editor of the Philadelphia Inquirer, Stan Wischnowski, resigned after employees walked out in protest over a headline "Buildings Matter, Too," on a story about the impact of civil unrest on property.

 

(Reporting by Jessica DiNapoli in New York; editing by Kenneth Li and Diane Craft)

 

reuters_logo.jpg

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-06-08
 
  • Haha 2
Posted
5 hours ago, PJPom said:

This report tends to support the understanding that the news we read has to reflect the opinion of the vocal minority. Send in the troops to quell the out of control looting seems a logical suggestion and the opinion that buildings, the loss of jobs and the cost to the public purse matters is important. Neither of these comments suits the bleeding hearts who take to Twitter, the newspaper’s Owners are there to make money and the fear of loosing advertisers makes them fold and only report what certain people wish to hear.

The press always claim freedom of the press is paramount but can’t they see they are only pandering to the vocal minority who will mercilessly crush any dissent through the power of social media.

 

 What happened to the much loved 'freedom of speech' (but not meaning fake news is OK)?

  • Like 1
  • Confused 1
Posted

I saw a news clip earlier today where one headline of the NYT was retracted and replaced by another. Apparently the first was seen as being 'Pres. Trump' friendly. I guess this is what the OP is about. I guess it depended on which way the two headlines were read by the individual. Obviously someone at NYT didn't like it.

  • Confused 3
Posted
10 hours ago, bluedoc said:

Floyd did resist arrest, hence the struggle. If you haven’t done anything wrong you won’t get arrested. If you struggle then force will be used. There is nothing contentious about force being used. It is also a practiced way of containing someone. Unfortunately Mr Floyds health was not the best, probably due to drug misuse. I’m sorry he died. But what has been the outcome of this incident has probably put relations further back.

Where to start with this heap of unbelievable excrement?

a) Resisting arrest? that is a case of "their words against several hours of on scene- video"!

AFAIK there is really not much (as in: basically nothing) to support that claim!

b) "Containing someone" who is handcuffed, face down on the street, involves choking him to death?

There was no other way?

I guess, you have this POV for yourself and your right- wing, racist comrads, here on TVF and in the USA!

c) it really does not matter IF his health was bad and if that was according to drug use!

I invite you to my place, where I will kneel and apply pressiure on your neck for 10 minutes! Let's see how you hold up!

d) no...you are not sorry he died! at least not as much as you should be!

e) what the heck does that last sentence even mean?

  • Confused 1

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.



×
×
  • Create New...