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

By Jessica DiNapoli

 

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)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2020-06-08

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

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.

 

Without any context this is a confusing article.

26 minutes ago, PJPom said:

This report tends to support the understanding that the news we read has to reflect the opinion of the vocal minority.

Not at all.

 

Tom Cotton is a racist senator from Arkansas.  The fact that he wants the US army to control the state is understandable, if repugnant, to the majority of americans. 

 

That the New York Times lets this 'vocal minority" publish a racist screed, pretending to be an 'opinion piece" is sad, but understandable in these confused times. Tom Cotton and his ilk, should take their anti american, fascist, opinions to networks and newspapers that publish bigoted op ed pieces daily and embrace fascism for The US; The New York Post or Washington Examiner stand at ready. Fox News will provide a ready cable platform. 

 

Edited June 8, 20206 yr by LomSak27

Censorship pure and simple. The NYT is a dying far left newspaper that does yeoman's work for the lunatic fringe. 

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.

 

 

Spot on.

 

Freedom of speech; Freedom of the press; Media Freedom.

 

All those freedoms now can only be allowed if what's communicated is politically correct and approved by the left liberals who demand total compliance.

 

If you dare communicate an opinion they disagree with you risk being fired, having co-workers protest against you, or worse.

 

Even when the vocal minority get crushed in elections, or shock defeats, they simply carry on with their attempts to oppress all they don't like. They only accept democracy if they like the result.

 

The biggest threat to freedom, liberty, democracy, equality, justice for all, today, is those that wish to impose what they consider to be politically correct and right on all others.

 

How those totalitarian states watching the "free world" must be laughing,

17 minutes ago, Baerboxer said:

How those totalitarian states watching the "free world" must be laughing,

Well it is quite amusing. Trump and Iran are having a fallout on Sina Weibo in Chinese.

 

Tell me that's not funny.

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)?

NYT is being taken over by the SJW crowd. They are threatening the editors with a strike each time an article is printed that does not meet their woke ideals.

If a company keeps hiring these radical types they only have themselves to blame for the loss of control.

56 minutes ago, Boon Mee said:

Censorship pure and simple. The NYT is a dying far left newspaper that does yeoman's work for the lunatic fringe. 

...ahm...correct me, if I am wrong, but Tom Cotton's "op-ed" was published, right?!

So he had his day and time to spew his facist agenda, his undemocratic views and his vile racism!

I don't really see, where the censorship is?

I found this interesting.

https://www.nationalreview.com/2020/06/the-hysterical-debate-over-federal-troops/

FAKE PRESIDENT   REAL NEWS

And all this coz some people think they need to make a mountain out of a mole hill.

No other problems ? Get back to work !

9 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.

 

"Out of control looting" ... interesting remark, as this seems not to be the case. 

Well well. NYtimes only wants one side ! This continues. I'm minded to vote for Trump again 

Here’s the ‘Freedom of Speech’ bit that the Illiberals bleating about ‘Freedom of Speech’ are failing to understand.

 

Say something offensive and be prepared to suffer the consequences.

 

The subject ‘opinions’ where published under ‘opinions’ in the NYT (a private business enterprise), readers and advertisers (the people who pay for the NYT) were offended by the ‘opinion’, the person responsible for the offensive ‘opinions’ suffered the consequences.

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.

6 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Censorship pure and simple. The NYT is a dying far left newspaper that does yeoman's work for the lunatic fringe. 

Last time I checked this (fringe) prefers Joe Biden by double digits seems most folks don’t think the military is needed to squash 99% peaceful protesters the nyt takes umbrage at someone in their employment siding with an authoritarian potus and rasist senator good for them imo

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

Here’s the ‘Freedom of Speech’ bit that the Illiberals bleating about ‘Freedom of Speech’ are failing to understand.

 

Say something offensive and be prepared to suffer the consequences.

 

The subject ‘opinions’ where published under ‘opinions’ in the NYT (a private business enterprise), readers and advertisers (the people who pay for the NYT) were offended by the ‘opinion’, the person responsible for the offensive ‘opinions’ suffered the consequences.

 

I never thought Chomper would stoop this low...

1 hour ago, Tug said:

Sir Floyd’s record is isent the issue it’s the murder of a handcuffed non resisting man at the hands of the police .extra judicial executions at the hands of the police are unacceptable in the USA that’s why folks of all races world wide are demonstrating as per the 1th amendment in the constitution of the USA 

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.

Edited June 8, 20206 yr by bluedoc

So where are all the 2nd amendment people now that the security of a free state actually is being threatened?  Rhetorical.  It's hasn't been about that in a long time.  Republicans have twisted it into a partisan issue they only use when its something they don't like.

Edited June 8, 20206 yr by shdmn

1 hour 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.

For over 8 minutes a handcuffed not resisting man was choked out by a police man I know the difference I’m my youth I’ve had the <deleted> beat out of me by the police for beeing stupid I know the difference that was imo an extra judicial killing at the hands of the police Floyd’s past and what he got arrested for are not an excuse nor imo the point and I beg to differ as far as pushing relations back quite the opposite imo

2 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.

Lol! The handcuffed guy was complaining he could not breathe and was calling his mum, passers-by were shouting he was dying and asking Chauvin to stop.... and on top of it he stayed on his neck for nearly three minutes after his colleague told him he felt no pulse.

3 hours ago, blazes said:

 

I never thought Chomper would stoop this low...

Go on then, explain to me where the infringement of freedom of speech is.

9 hours ago, Tropposurfer said:

"Out of control looting" ... interesting remark, as this seems not to be the case. 

Can you share some examples of "in control looting?"

13 hours ago, Boon Mee said:

Censorship pure and simple. The NYT is a dying far left newspaper that does yeoman's work for the lunatic fringe. 

The NYTs has readership of over 6 million ???? get your facts straight ????

26 minutes ago, Redline said:

The NYTs has readership of over 6 million ???? get your facts straight ????

 

How refreshing to find an absolutely clear example of "fake news"!!!!

 

The circulation of the NYT in January 2019 was 483,000!!!!!!!!

https://www.statista.com/statistics/184682/us-daily-newspapers-by-circulation/

 

This statistic (admittedly over a year ago) was extremely easy to find.

 

Or were you really trying to say that you have heard somewhere (CNN?  CNBC? ) that as many as 13 people get to read a single issue of the NYT?!!!

33 minutes ago, blazes said:

The circulation of the NYT in January 2019 was 483,000!!!!!!!!

...

Or were you really trying to say that you have heard somewhere (CNN?  CNBC? ) that as many as 13 people get to read a single issue of the NYT?!!!

You do know that they have a website as well? They have 2.6 million digital-only subscribers, meaning they only need two readers per subscription to have more than 6 million readers. And then, of course, they have the freeloaders such as myself that read the articles on the website without paying.

 

A troll post and a reply have been removed

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?