The most challenging thing to watch is Cooper on Trump's knees.
4
I would like to see coverage of Donald Trump with the blatant falsehoods redacted or bleeped out. It would be interesting to see what would be left.
66
It's true a large segment of the press (not just Fox News) has served as an enabler for Mr. Trump. The problem is it may be too late to do anything meaningful about it. His supporters don't seem to care about facts. They believe he is trustworthy even when presented with evidence to the contrary. They believe his economic policies (such as they are) will reduce the debt even when shown his policies will dramatically increase the debt and deficit. They believe he is honest even when his blatant lies are pointed out. We live in strange times.
70
You can stop telling us how the media can do its job, and start doing your job. Everything written in this piece has been obvious for awhile, and hashed out on these editorial pages. Maybe you could've used your space today to update us on the investigations into Trump's charity, which seems much more corrupt and fraudulent than Clinton's, which has been covered ad nauseam.
70
Who among us isn't a "liar," having told lies for self-aggrandizement, to avoid embarrassment, to gain some advantage or other? Certainly Clinton and Trump are both liars. But is that the only--or even the best--measure of a person's honesty? Trump's dishonesty goes far beyond the conventional lie. He is a con man and thief who exploits the vulnerable, creates narratives out of whole cloth, ignores facts, misrepresentt history, and manipulates the electorate in a way that would make Joseph Goebbels proud. Clinton is a liar, but Trump is an unprincipled demagogue who is downright dangerous.
40
Finally...a call to arms
there is still time for the "goods" be divided up among the hundreds of
reporters in America. Separate truth from lie.
Be the ethical arbiter the press has been often in our history....
Time is getting short.
there is still time for the "goods" be divided up among the hundreds of
reporters in America. Separate truth from lie.
Be the ethical arbiter the press has been often in our history....
Time is getting short.
41
It is becoming more and more bodacious that Trump is dishing out a bunch of bosh, without any tinge of conscience. A septuagenarian, instead of being a mature adult, is regressing back to the toddler stage of terrible twos. If anything, he is certainly faking bonhomie, much less practicing it. Has he even attempted to exude confidence and honesty? Bubkes.
His burgeoning callowness, in whatever he says and does, also seem quite callous as well. The political canards, he is manufacturing, even challenges the epithet - liar - that so adorns Hillary. A caparison of sorts covers his nasty notions. In essence, he has reached the capstone of his perfidy.
And for Hillary, these should not act as chutzpah to become smug and be flippant about the debate. She also has a lot of comeuppance to face, for whatever she has blundered about. A coup doeil, of what she as achieved and what she has floundered in, can be a starting point. Rest will be the voters' choice - a juggernaut.
His burgeoning callowness, in whatever he says and does, also seem quite callous as well. The political canards, he is manufacturing, even challenges the epithet - liar - that so adorns Hillary. A caparison of sorts covers his nasty notions. In essence, he has reached the capstone of his perfidy.
And for Hillary, these should not act as chutzpah to become smug and be flippant about the debate. She also has a lot of comeuppance to face, for whatever she has blundered about. A coup doeil, of what she as achieved and what she has floundered in, can be a starting point. Rest will be the voters' choice - a juggernaut.
3
Thank you for acknowledging the past failure of the press during the lead up to the Iraq War. I constantly found myself turning to the opinion pages of the New York Times in order to find out what was truly happening. As editorial writers substantiated their opinions with facts, which were missing from the front pages, I saw how "reporters" were merely regurgitating press releases, and had not merely abandoned duty to the nation but had become a propaganda tool of the state. What a disgrace that unsubstantiated opinion was on the front page, and facts were in the opinion pages! The NYT helped teach the nation that facts are just another opinion. It must end!
44
Well said Mr. Kristof, however many of your colleagues in all media have carved out a very lucrative niche for themselves by being mere stenographers. With, I might add, the seeming approval of their media bosses. There is an irony that the country that best exemplifies the collective worship of the dollar might very well be laid low by that same pursuit. Unfortunately, the international ramifications of a Trump incumbency show this to be the world's problem. I pray there are enough sane Americans to stop this unstable demagogue in his tracks. To those sane Americans who would vote for Trump, it says a lot more about you than him. Think about it.
21
It's easy to cover him. Call him names. Everyone is doing it, why not. Just like they teach in Journalism School I guess.
7
Try covering this charlatan as the media, exempting FOX "News" and Right Wing radio, both of which are nothing but propaganda machines, should have been doing all along.
It doesn't take long for someone who is a poorly educated white person, semi-literate and ignorant as to how their government operates to find in Trump one of their own. Except for the glaring fact that he is not one of them, he just pretends to be. He tapped into the mood of the angry and frustrated who are looking for some boogeyman to blame for what ails them. The US has been moving in positive strides, improving our lot, getting us out of the mire we faced in '08. But those who never liked President Obama, who were never willing to give him any support, but instead found fault with everything he did, have been harboring this pent-up hate for eight years.
Trump is the anti-Obama, the anti-Hillary, the anti-establishment anti-intellect candidate who brings all the obscene anger racism and division in this country to its boiling point. Trump is the lightning rod for all those who mad at their nation and are looking to cast blame not find reasonable solutions.
There is no cure for them. They are a slow-thinking dim-witted lot who take awhile but eventually find out that even Trump is no cure for their problems. Those problems are deeply embedded in their psyche, and only when they come to terms with what ails them will they feel any solace. I pity them.
DD
Manhattan
It doesn't take long for someone who is a poorly educated white person, semi-literate and ignorant as to how their government operates to find in Trump one of their own. Except for the glaring fact that he is not one of them, he just pretends to be. He tapped into the mood of the angry and frustrated who are looking for some boogeyman to blame for what ails them. The US has been moving in positive strides, improving our lot, getting us out of the mire we faced in '08. But those who never liked President Obama, who were never willing to give him any support, but instead found fault with everything he did, have been harboring this pent-up hate for eight years.
Trump is the anti-Obama, the anti-Hillary, the anti-establishment anti-intellect candidate who brings all the obscene anger racism and division in this country to its boiling point. Trump is the lightning rod for all those who mad at their nation and are looking to cast blame not find reasonable solutions.
There is no cure for them. They are a slow-thinking dim-witted lot who take awhile but eventually find out that even Trump is no cure for their problems. Those problems are deeply embedded in their psyche, and only when they come to terms with what ails them will they feel any solace. I pity them.
DD
Manhattan
44
Too little too late. People who know what a fraud he do not need to be told that he is a fraud nor do they need to be told by an employee of a news organization how journalists are compile in the fraud.
Maybe you saw the piece on how many lies were told this week. Where was this last month or the month before?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/09/24/us/elections/donald-trump-...®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
Maybe you saw the piece on how many lies were told this week. Where was this last month or the month before?
http://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2016/09/24/us/elections/donald-trump-...®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
17
Speaking of journalism, this column is fabulous. But my heart breaks that this subject comes so late in the game. This is a dismal and dangerous commentary on what must be going on in journalism schools.
If Mr. Kristof's vital message can be carried NOW into the halls of print and TV media perhaps, I pray, it can still have an impact but we have precious few days to go. We should all do our part and write letters to our local newspapers with the same message as Mr. Kristof's column here, and quote him. We, the public and journalists, must all get involved NOW and speak up.
If Mr. Kristof's vital message can be carried NOW into the halls of print and TV media perhaps, I pray, it can still have an impact but we have precious few days to go. We should all do our part and write letters to our local newspapers with the same message as Mr. Kristof's column here, and quote him. We, the public and journalists, must all get involved NOW and speak up.
36
Just debate with lie detectors on. Trump can't even say his name without lying. In fact his dad used to pretend they were Swedish so he could hide their German ancestry from his Jewish tenants.
Have the Wizard of Oz bring his taxes in on a big balloon.
33
The projected audience of about 100 million viewers will NOT be tuning in for a debate. They are interested in the political equivalent of a DEMOLITION DERBY. The referee will be in the arena with equal status in this match.
We all know the players in this game. There is nothing new to learn about them or their policies. It is ludicrous to call this confrontation a debate when one of the participants is a sociopath.
The audience is looking for a crash and blood on the studio floor. The so-called moderator is an equal contender in this reality show. The smart money is on the referee being the biggest loser at the end of the program.
So get out the popcorn and be ready for what will almost certainly be an evening of gross and painful political entertainment.
Richard Ellmyer
Portland, Oregon
We all know the players in this game. There is nothing new to learn about them or their policies. It is ludicrous to call this confrontation a debate when one of the participants is a sociopath.
The audience is looking for a crash and blood on the studio floor. The so-called moderator is an equal contender in this reality show. The smart money is on the referee being the biggest loser at the end of the program.
So get out the popcorn and be ready for what will almost certainly be an evening of gross and painful political entertainment.
Richard Ellmyer
Portland, Oregon
25
"Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling. As we move to the debates, let’s remember that to expose charlatans is not partisanship, but simply good journalism."
Mr. Kristof, truer words have not been spoken -- or more desperately needed -- as we approach election day. There is so much more at stake in this election than any other election that I have experienced in over six decades.
At no other time has it been so important for our journalists and reporters to "report the facts". Without the facts, this election might prove to be Trump's biggest successful scam thus far in his deceptive, lie-infested life.
Certainly, most people of reasonable intelligence can recognize a lie when they hear one -- especially those of us closely attuned to political events. However, there are many more who don't follow politics and rely on the media for the "facts". Unless the facts are truthfully reported, this election process is nothing more than a theatrical event where success is measured by its entertainment value.
If our news media has come to this, then God help us all. Many of us who are sensitive to these realities are deeply troubled by the poor quality of the coverage thus far in this campaign.
We, rightfully, are seriously concerned that the Fourth Estate is abdicating its fundamental responsibility to report the truth and all of the facts that they believe could or should weigh heavily on voters minds if they are to make an "informed choice".
Mr. Kristof, truer words have not been spoken -- or more desperately needed -- as we approach election day. There is so much more at stake in this election than any other election that I have experienced in over six decades.
At no other time has it been so important for our journalists and reporters to "report the facts". Without the facts, this election might prove to be Trump's biggest successful scam thus far in his deceptive, lie-infested life.
Certainly, most people of reasonable intelligence can recognize a lie when they hear one -- especially those of us closely attuned to political events. However, there are many more who don't follow politics and rely on the media for the "facts". Unless the facts are truthfully reported, this election process is nothing more than a theatrical event where success is measured by its entertainment value.
If our news media has come to this, then God help us all. Many of us who are sensitive to these realities are deeply troubled by the poor quality of the coverage thus far in this campaign.
We, rightfully, are seriously concerned that the Fourth Estate is abdicating its fundamental responsibility to report the truth and all of the facts that they believe could or should weigh heavily on voters minds if they are to make an "informed choice".
13
Perfectly put. These are not normal times calling for normal reporting. Trump is a manipulative demagogue, as you so aptly call him, and the press has been easily used by him to further his dangerous game. I hope our press does its job as the Fourth Estate. In the end, it's about protecting the republic. Sometimes it is only the press that can do it.
15
Maybe I read the wrong newspapers and watch the wrong TV news. The media that I've seen have consistently reported Trumps statements as inaccurate, exaggerated, outrageous, and false from the very beginning of his campaign. It was reported when he denigrated Mexicans as rapists and criminals, that the accusation didn't match the evidence. His disparaging Senator McCain was immediately regarded as an outrage. We've repeatedly been told that a wall along our southern border would be ineffective and that only an idiot would expect the Mexican government to pay for it.
And none of that reporting has mattered!
Trumps support rests largely with relatively disadvantaged white people who believe that they have been abandoned by the American dream. They are convinced that anything resembling a status quo government will fail to make their lives better, and probably will make things worse. So, they want someone whose entire approach will be radically different whether it's likely to do them any good or not.
It's sad.
And none of that reporting has mattered!
Trumps support rests largely with relatively disadvantaged white people who believe that they have been abandoned by the American dream. They are convinced that anything resembling a status quo government will fail to make their lives better, and probably will make things worse. So, they want someone whose entire approach will be radically different whether it's likely to do them any good or not.
It's sad.
29
You'll be surprised how many Trump supporters are determined not to let Hillary Clinton's entourage of thieves into power again. Read the article on Clinton and Goldman Sachs NYT quickly buried instead of leaving it as a major headline.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/us/politics/bill-hillary-clinton-goldm...®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
That, combined with the fact that Hillary the hawk will be eager to obey Netanyahu's orders for a military attack on Iran (how else to keep her billionaire friends happy), is enough for me to vote for anyone but Clinton.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/09/25/us/politics/bill-hillary-clinton-goldm...®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news
That, combined with the fact that Hillary the hawk will be eager to obey Netanyahu's orders for a military attack on Iran (how else to keep her billionaire friends happy), is enough for me to vote for anyone but Clinton.
8
"Some traditionalists are horrified at the recent journalistic toughening, .."
It's been a while since I read anything written by a 'journalist'. I don't consider a stream of propaganda journalism, whether on the election or anything to do with ME or Ukraine, endlessly reads like propaganda. Fortunately, these days there are many international papers available to readers, and we do read them to judge things for ourselves.
Calling a candidate names, deservedly or not, is not journalism. Don't tell me what to think, just give me the facts. Yes, you are an opinion writer, not a journalist, but last week you told your readers how wonderful things were for the poor across the world, and as a global citizen we should all be happy. Not a single mention of how people in China or India are moving out of poverty because American jobs have been transferred to those countries, and therefore their wellbeing has come at the cost of Americans losing their jobs. I consider pieces like that to be propaganda (feel better because your misery has helped others around the world).
Do you really think people will think less of Trump because Kristof called him a 'charlatan'? Au-contraire, people will think less of Kristof because he is so frustrated he is resorting to cheap shots.
It's been a while since I read anything written by a 'journalist'. I don't consider a stream of propaganda journalism, whether on the election or anything to do with ME or Ukraine, endlessly reads like propaganda. Fortunately, these days there are many international papers available to readers, and we do read them to judge things for ourselves.
Calling a candidate names, deservedly or not, is not journalism. Don't tell me what to think, just give me the facts. Yes, you are an opinion writer, not a journalist, but last week you told your readers how wonderful things were for the poor across the world, and as a global citizen we should all be happy. Not a single mention of how people in China or India are moving out of poverty because American jobs have been transferred to those countries, and therefore their wellbeing has come at the cost of Americans losing their jobs. I consider pieces like that to be propaganda (feel better because your misery has helped others around the world).
Do you really think people will think less of Trump because Kristof called him a 'charlatan'? Au-contraire, people will think less of Kristof because he is so frustrated he is resorting to cheap shots.
9
You finally woke up?
Your media has done so much damage toe the process that you ought to be ashamed of yourselves./
WE need a new mainstream press who doesn’t surrender to the news cycle of nonsensical cable tv. We need a new mainstream media who is not afraid to call out someone when they are obviously wrong. We need a new mainstream media that stops parroting the talking points of shills.
Your media has done so much damage toe the process that you ought to be ashamed of yourselves./
WE need a new mainstream press who doesn’t surrender to the news cycle of nonsensical cable tv. We need a new mainstream media who is not afraid to call out someone when they are obviously wrong. We need a new mainstream media that stops parroting the talking points of shills.
37
One presumes it's not too late for journalists to save the media from their complicity in the promotion of Donald Trump for the past year. Problem is, when the founding fathers wrote the First Amendment, their notion of the press was nothing at all like the giant global media-entertainment conglomerates we have now dominating the process. The privilege is not to entertain, but to inform.
“Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.”
“Where have you gone, Joe DiMaggio? Our nation turns its lonely eyes to you.”
6
Thank you, Nicholas Kristof, for your courage. You're one of the very few who will at least come out of this dangerous media nightmare clean.
6
One would think that a basic drive for self-preservation would have prompted the major media to more accurately cover Trump's pathological lying in order to thwart his expressed intent to curtail First Amendment rights.
However much one would like to think that the major media executives and "journalists" are moral competent professionals, the evidence is clear that most of them are not any more prudent than a typical myopically greedy Republican.
However much one would like to think that the major media executives and "journalists" are moral competent professionals, the evidence is clear that most of them are not any more prudent than a typical myopically greedy Republican.
8
Coverage and commentary on Trump sometimes seem to produce the opposite effect than the journalists intended. Here in the blissful, over-educated, way upper middle class Washington DC suburbs, you'd expect few Trump supporters. But you'd be very wrong. It seems that many people here are reacting negatively to the constant media drumbeat -- led especially by the Washington Post's Dana Milbank -- that call him everything from racist to very possibly a torturer of small cute fuzzy animals. Its the media tone that is driving people towards Trump, not the obvious facts of unsuitability to be President. Yes, talk radio and loathing for Clinton are also factors, but really it is the urge to give "the media" a slap in the face for constantly telling people that they are uneducated racist fools for supporting Trump. So many of these people are not uneducated haters that they can see through the media messaging and now wish nothing more than to turn the tables. Bad choice for America -- I think yes -- but for many it is the only way to fight back.
6
Insecure women stick with their abusers for years--because these men have them convinced that they have no other options--that the "need" them, that they are the woman's only chance to avoid some (unspoken) bad outcome.
And no amount of fact-reminding them is going to change their allegiance to these men. He sings their song! They love him. He makes them feel positive and hopeful for the future. And so it is with Trump supporters.
And no amount of fact-reminding them is going to change their allegiance to these men. He sings their song! They love him. He makes them feel positive and hopeful for the future. And so it is with Trump supporters.
13
Many of these women do get away. Maybe not the first or second time, but eventually many do leave. So it can be with Trump supporters. So keep the facts coming. Please!!
30
"Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling. As we move to the debates, let’s remember that to expose charlatans is not partisanship, but simply good journalism."
Mr. Kristof, truer words have not been spoken -- or more desperately needed -- as we approach election day. There is so much more at stake in this election than any other election that I have experienced in over six decades.
At no other time has it been so important for our journalists and reporters to "report the facts". Without the facts, this election might prove to be Trump's biggest successful scam thus far in his deceptive, lie-infested life.
Certainly, most people of reasonable intelligence can recognize a lie when they hear one -- especially those of us closely attuned to political events. However, there are many more who don't follow politics and rely on the media for the "facts". Unless the facts are truthfully reported, this election process is nothing more than a theatrical event where success is measured by its entertainment value.
If our news media has come to this, then God help us all. Many of us who are sensitive to these realities are deeply troubled by the poor quality of the coverage thus far in this campaign.
We, rightfully, are seriously concerned that the Fourth Estate is abdicating its fundamental responsibility to report the truth and all of the facts that they believe should could or should weigh heavily on voters minds if they are to make an "informed choice".
Mr. Kristof, truer words have not been spoken -- or more desperately needed -- as we approach election day. There is so much more at stake in this election than any other election that I have experienced in over six decades.
At no other time has it been so important for our journalists and reporters to "report the facts". Without the facts, this election might prove to be Trump's biggest successful scam thus far in his deceptive, lie-infested life.
Certainly, most people of reasonable intelligence can recognize a lie when they hear one -- especially those of us closely attuned to political events. However, there are many more who don't follow politics and rely on the media for the "facts". Unless the facts are truthfully reported, this election process is nothing more than a theatrical event where success is measured by its entertainment value.
If our news media has come to this, then God help us all. Many of us who are sensitive to these realities are deeply troubled by the poor quality of the coverage thus far in this campaign.
We, rightfully, are seriously concerned that the Fourth Estate is abdicating its fundamental responsibility to report the truth and all of the facts that they believe should could or should weigh heavily on voters minds if they are to make an "informed choice".
6
The Media never did get the email story correct. Instead the Press repeated on ridiculous story and lie foisted on the nation by the Republicans as it did about the phony scandal of Whitewater.
17
I believe that voters, when they get in the voting booth, will go with Clinton. She's apt not to embarrass the nation, she will stand up to foreign nutcases, and she gives a darn about the average American. Trump will embarrass the nation, he won't stand up to foreign nutcases (re Putin, making deals etc) and he doesn't give a flying puck for the average American. He never did before, why should he now?
21
"No one left to lie to" by Hitchens. All facts about the Clintons. Sounds like you like facts? Mr. Kristof, your headline alone disqualifies you from being anointed a "judge" on facts. The day you put forth Soros' megalomania next to Trumps', I will start trusting there is an ounce of neutrality in your writing. The following statement by that megalomaniac that's Clintons' puppet master is given a total free pass by the left and I quote; "When asked by Britain's Independent newspaper to elaborate on that passage, Soros said, "It is a sort of disease when you consider yourself some kind of god, the creator of everything, but I feel comfortable about it now since I began to live it out."
Since I began to live it out. Those unfamiliar with Soros would probably dismiss the statement out of hand. But for those who have followed his career and sociopolitical endeavors, it cannot be taken quite so lightly." End quote. Ominous to say the least, but it's Clinton's current puppet master so no worries, until of course, he gets upset with her and subsequently you, "free thinker and speaker" as well. You are playing a dangerous game here pardoning one side over the other I must say.
Since I began to live it out. Those unfamiliar with Soros would probably dismiss the statement out of hand. But for those who have followed his career and sociopolitical endeavors, it cannot be taken quite so lightly." End quote. Ominous to say the least, but it's Clinton's current puppet master so no worries, until of course, he gets upset with her and subsequently you, "free thinker and speaker" as well. You are playing a dangerous game here pardoning one side over the other I must say.
5
I am heartened that coverage of Trump has finally toughened among some news outlets, but I am afraid it is too late. I cannot understand why the press allowed someone as dangerous for our country as Trump is gain so much traction. All the stories that are now finally being reported on have been there since before he descended on his escalator to announce that he is running for president, and that Mexicans are rapists and drug dealers. His failed multiple bankruptcies, his stiffing contractors, his fraudulent Trump University, his phony charitable foundation, his illegal uses of other people's money from said foundation, his ties to Russian oligarchs, his bombastic lying, womanizing, race baiting, xenophobia - these did not just happen this month, yet they are only being focused on this month.
I am daily in utter disbelief that this country is this close to electing a maniac to the highest office, to giving so much power to someone so incompetent and dangerous. Should he be elected, I will lay most of the blame on the press failure to shine light on the reality of Trump throughout the primary and most of the general election cycle. The fact that there are more people in this country that find Trump more trustworthy than Hillary Clinton proves the media has failed to this point. And I am afraid it is too late to make up for that failure, no matter how many columns are written by journalists as brilliant as Nicholas Christof from now until election day.
I am daily in utter disbelief that this country is this close to electing a maniac to the highest office, to giving so much power to someone so incompetent and dangerous. Should he be elected, I will lay most of the blame on the press failure to shine light on the reality of Trump throughout the primary and most of the general election cycle. The fact that there are more people in this country that find Trump more trustworthy than Hillary Clinton proves the media has failed to this point. And I am afraid it is too late to make up for that failure, no matter how many columns are written by journalists as brilliant as Nicholas Christof from now until election day.
19
I think there is a way to say, "This continues to not be true." That is not a matter of opinion, it is a statement of fact.
9
I just watched Meet The Press with Chuck Todd who asked John Podesta, Secretary Clinton's campaign chair how Secretary Clinton could restore voters trust, and her trustworthiness, whereas he asked no such question of Michael Flynn a top advisor to Mr. Trump. Mr. Todd kept harping on Secretary Clinton's credibility but asked no such questions of retired general Flynn. Talk about holding Mr. Trump accountable and asking about his credibility (not). I was aghast at such blatant disregard for fairness. Shame on Mr. Todd.
28
It is frightening journalists are perplexed given their civic influence and role as generational voice pieces. What we are seeing with Trump is not new. Throughout history writers have been documenting abuse of power narratives. Do today’s American journalists study the history of journalism and its role in democracy or the humanities?
After Edward R. Murrow there was serious coverage challenging power during the Vietnam War. The 2005 film, “Street Fight” about corruption in incumbent Newark mayor Sharpe James’ reelection campaign. And the 19th century muckrakers? Don’t today’s journalists have a playbook on the history of investigative reporting?
I was also frustrated by your recent article “My Shared Shame”. Two of the quotes were from the Today show’s Ann Curry and Mr. Begleiter formerly from CNN, two broadcast vehicles that arguably distribute infotainment, not investigative journalism.
Our media can barely remove itself from snaps, tweets, click bait, and social media likes. Investigative journalism is a public service that we need for a functioning democracy but the news is more interested in page views.
Aren’t professionals supposed to think strategically before issues snowball into the kind of Trump coverage we have seen? The March 26 article says, “Although many of us journalists have derided Trump, the truth is that he generally outsmarted us…”. That is tragically shortsighted of the journalism community whose job is to be the public interest watchdog.
After Edward R. Murrow there was serious coverage challenging power during the Vietnam War. The 2005 film, “Street Fight” about corruption in incumbent Newark mayor Sharpe James’ reelection campaign. And the 19th century muckrakers? Don’t today’s journalists have a playbook on the history of investigative reporting?
I was also frustrated by your recent article “My Shared Shame”. Two of the quotes were from the Today show’s Ann Curry and Mr. Begleiter formerly from CNN, two broadcast vehicles that arguably distribute infotainment, not investigative journalism.
Our media can barely remove itself from snaps, tweets, click bait, and social media likes. Investigative journalism is a public service that we need for a functioning democracy but the news is more interested in page views.
Aren’t professionals supposed to think strategically before issues snowball into the kind of Trump coverage we have seen? The March 26 article says, “Although many of us journalists have derided Trump, the truth is that he generally outsmarted us…”. That is tragically shortsighted of the journalism community whose job is to be the public interest watchdog.
10
This morning I saw a clip of Trump commenting on Lester Holt on the upcoming debate. In a few seconds he said (paraphrasing) that:
a) Holt was a Democrat (which is not true)
b) The (Holt and the rest) were all Democrats (obviously not true)
c) The system was "rigged against him" (he presented no evidence supporting this charge, except for the preceding two declarative statements, both of which were lies).
How should the media treat this sort of thing? I suggest immediate, total and blatant disdain. This is not the sort of thinking and commentary that befits a legitimate candidate for President of the United States. And the media should not be shy in saying exactly that. Still again, you're not dealing with a Mother Teresa.
a) Holt was a Democrat (which is not true)
b) The (Holt and the rest) were all Democrats (obviously not true)
c) The system was "rigged against him" (he presented no evidence supporting this charge, except for the preceding two declarative statements, both of which were lies).
How should the media treat this sort of thing? I suggest immediate, total and blatant disdain. This is not the sort of thinking and commentary that befits a legitimate candidate for President of the United States. And the media should not be shy in saying exactly that. Still again, you're not dealing with a Mother Teresa.
19
If Trump wins, can we still say the system is rigged?
1
The photo of Joe McCarthy is very apt. His right hand man attorney Roy Cohn, a vicious attack dog, was Donald Trump's mentor. Neither the truth nor facts ever entered into the Cohn assault strategy of smearing his opponents with lies. Donald Trump is his protege and he learned his lessons well.
Journalists who play the "fair and balanced" game when the facts are obvious are merely propagandists who undermine democracy. Only in a dumbed-down society can a Donald Trump be a candidate for President.
Journalists who play the "fair and balanced" game when the facts are obvious are merely propagandists who undermine democracy. Only in a dumbed-down society can a Donald Trump be a candidate for President.
18
And why do you think this is so, Mr. Kristof? Because journalists are not about reporting the news anymore. They are about selling a product. Any maybe most of the blame should be centered on television media/journalism. What would happen if a person like Donald Trump were actually subjected to follow-up questions, really hard hitting follow up questions? He would look like a fool, and then refuse to come back on the program. THAT is why no one, let alone Trump, are ever subjected to any real questioning.
19
I watched 13 Hours last night, the cinema version of Benghazi. Accepting that the theatrical version is inaccurate there's still a feeling I get of extraordinarily poor leadership on Hillary's part. Not to mention the skill that the snake oil salesman Obama used to stay completely detached and to skate on the whole event. I've watched the FBI Director Comey's Whitewash, re-read all the victim's who were raped by Bill Clinton, and heard lie after lie after lie recited by Mrs. Bill Clinton. I can only come to one general conclusion and that is that the liberals and the democrat media moguls care primarily about power. They can muster an adequate amount of testosterone to say that Hillary has courage, that she has experience and tout a determined character. But that's where it stops. She is never described as truthful, honest, loyal, patriotic or any characteristic that we conservative neanderthals value. So to trash her opponent for flaws that don't even approach the least of the woman's torrid record is to no avail except to the minions.
3
Referring to her as "Mrs. Bill Clinton" pretty much gives away your game.
17
I've seen no evidence of truthfulness, honesty, loyalty, or even real patriotism from Trump. And I wonder, did 13 Hours mention Republican-driven budget cuts to embassy security around the world that compromised security in Libya? And did it mention that Amassador Stevens' sister doesn't blame Hillary? I'd be wary of basing any decision on a Hollywood dramatization of this event, or any other.
And now, I'm off to see Snowden at the local multiplex....
And now, I'm off to see Snowden at the local multiplex....
13
You must not know much about Trump. Just start with the fact that his mentor was Roy Cohen, who died in disgrace and poverty. All his hoarding of drugs more deserving of other AIDS patients could not save him.
I hope to see Trump have a similar fall along with his children.
I hope to see Trump have a similar fall along with his children.
10
It is a sticky wicket, isn't it. But not that sticky. When journalists uncover such things as bribery and corruption in governments, they're clearly doing their job and the public thanks them for honoring their duty. Why should exposing the blatant lies of a candidate for the presidency be set to a higher bar?
Fear of seeming to be partisan in the legitimate press has become a bogeyman due to the unrelenting efforts of those who fear the truth because they know it will hurt them and their aspirations. Those efforts themselves are typically fueled by lies.
By exposing lies the legitimate press is doing its near-sacred duty. It should do so without fear of being called partisan. To hold back in fear of that would be to admit the success of a long running propaganda campaign by those who fear the truth.
Fear of seeming to be partisan in the legitimate press has become a bogeyman due to the unrelenting efforts of those who fear the truth because they know it will hurt them and their aspirations. Those efforts themselves are typically fueled by lies.
By exposing lies the legitimate press is doing its near-sacred duty. It should do so without fear of being called partisan. To hold back in fear of that would be to admit the success of a long running propaganda campaign by those who fear the truth.
12
We shouldn't forget that Donald Trump has sneaked up on us. Yes, he's been there for everyone to see from the start of this Presidential campaign. But at first, at the very beginning of the Republican Primary Debates, he was regarded by most people as a clown. No one took him seriously. In fact, viewers of the debates, especially Democrats, liked to see the way he took down his adversaries on the stage. Then presto, the adversaries started dropping out one by one. It came down to Rubio, Cruz and Trump. Things began to get serious. Trump could actually win. What had been entertainment turned into horror. Finally, we're attacking what he says and does. Yes, it is about time, but it's also understandable why it didn't happen sooner.
5
Nicholas,
I have watched the greatest nation disintegrate since the election of 1980. I have why seemingly wise educated and kind people have allowed Charlatans and Scoundrels destroy the greatest experiment in human social evolution and put asunder what was the world's greatest nation.
I looked at the Toronto Star today and eureka I found out I have been asking the wrong question.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorial_cartoon/2016/09/25/greg-perry-...
I have watched the greatest nation disintegrate since the election of 1980. I have why seemingly wise educated and kind people have allowed Charlatans and Scoundrels destroy the greatest experiment in human social evolution and put asunder what was the world's greatest nation.
I looked at the Toronto Star today and eureka I found out I have been asking the wrong question.
https://www.thestar.com/opinion/editorial_cartoon/2016/09/25/greg-perry-...
6
"Yet I can see how the endless media coverage of Clinton’s email evasiveness might incline some casual voters to perceive Trump as the more honest figure."
If you want a more recent example of Hillary Clinton's lying and dishonesty read Executive Order 13526-Classified National Security Information, and then consider her statements on the email server issue. The lies and irresponsibility will be quite obvious.
If you want a more recent example of Hillary Clinton's lying and dishonesty read Executive Order 13526-Classified National Security Information, and then consider her statements on the email server issue. The lies and irresponsibility will be quite obvious.
6
I'd rather read about all of Trump's transgressions. It may take longer, but well worth reading.
15
"What's the media's job??" -- You do realize that it's a bit late in the game to be asking that, especially since you've shed every last bit of ink on creating this dog-and-pony-show, don't you??
First, by ignoring Donald Trump from the start -- and then by keeping the lights trained on him, without realizing you had fallen into his P.R. trap.
It made no difference that the man is insane and one of the least qualified presidential candidates to come along in a long time.
No. You swallowed the bait, and continued to pump out the same lies and half-truths that has kept the Republican Party in business for years.
So now you can all give yourselves a collective pat on the back, and bow out during the debate.
First, by ignoring Donald Trump from the start -- and then by keeping the lights trained on him, without realizing you had fallen into his P.R. trap.
It made no difference that the man is insane and one of the least qualified presidential candidates to come along in a long time.
No. You swallowed the bait, and continued to pump out the same lies and half-truths that has kept the Republican Party in business for years.
So now you can all give yourselves a collective pat on the back, and bow out during the debate.
12
One factor Mr. Kristof ignores is that a major reason for Trump's success is he is perceived as genuine. Hillary is not; she is in many ways manipulative. Of course Trump is dishonest, but he is who he is, and he is not afraid to say things that are politically dangerous.
It's the authentic nitwit Trump versus the inauthentic very smart Hillary. A lot of it comes down to which personality, on a gut level, do you want to see on TV, and such, for the next four years? Hopefully enough Americans will choose Clinton, but if not, autenticity will have been a major factor.
It's the authentic nitwit Trump versus the inauthentic very smart Hillary. A lot of it comes down to which personality, on a gut level, do you want to see on TV, and such, for the next four years? Hopefully enough Americans will choose Clinton, but if not, autenticity will have been a major factor.
7
Somehow people perceive dishonesty as more honest ??
I get what you're saying, but it sure speaks poorly of the intelligence and integrity of the average American voter.
I get what you're saying, but it sure speaks poorly of the intelligence and integrity of the average American voter.
20
Is serial lying authentic? Is promising things you have no intention, or capability, of fulfilling authentic?
Please. Trump lies repeatedly to influence the voters he wants. That is not authentic.
Please. Trump lies repeatedly to influence the voters he wants. That is not authentic.
18
Yes dishonesty can be seen as more honest. People who like Trump's authenticity don't see him as dishonest. They ignore or do not even realize what a bull-artist he is. On some level many may even think a bull-artist who is real is preferable to a manipulator who is not. Unfortunately that is not the whole story. Clinton is so superior in every other way.
11
One way to show the false equivalence between Clinton's "transgressions" and Trump's endless, flip-flopping drivel is to point out the unfairness of the Republican Party, in particular the House, in their endless investigations of HRC while comparing these House witch-hunts with Congressional investigations of Presidents Reagan and George W. Bush.
Was Bush43 or Powell or Rumsfeld called in front of Congress repeatedly for obvious, horrendous mistakes leading up to the war in Iraq, for the mistake of relying on far too many troops to hold ground after the misadventure's initial successes, for the mistake of disbanding the Iraqi Army, for dropping the ball in Afghanistan to pursue the Iraq misadventure, and for embassy personnel who were killed during Bush43's presidency? There were some investigations, but HRC has been targeted forever with regard to Benghazi and the emails. Are these two "transgressions" even close in magnitude to everything that happened under Bush43?
With regard to Saint Reagan, Tip O'Neill agreed to ONE Congressional hearing after Iran-Contra was revealed. Iran-Contra makes anything HRC has ever done look miniscule. It was an impeachable offense. And, what about the 241 Marines killed in Beirut? Was Casper Weinberger dragged in front of Congress repeatedly to address that horrendous failure?
This is where the false equivalency can be demonstrated with great clarity. Just look at history and how HRC has been treated relative to those who preceded her.
Was Bush43 or Powell or Rumsfeld called in front of Congress repeatedly for obvious, horrendous mistakes leading up to the war in Iraq, for the mistake of relying on far too many troops to hold ground after the misadventure's initial successes, for the mistake of disbanding the Iraqi Army, for dropping the ball in Afghanistan to pursue the Iraq misadventure, and for embassy personnel who were killed during Bush43's presidency? There were some investigations, but HRC has been targeted forever with regard to Benghazi and the emails. Are these two "transgressions" even close in magnitude to everything that happened under Bush43?
With regard to Saint Reagan, Tip O'Neill agreed to ONE Congressional hearing after Iran-Contra was revealed. Iran-Contra makes anything HRC has ever done look miniscule. It was an impeachable offense. And, what about the 241 Marines killed in Beirut? Was Casper Weinberger dragged in front of Congress repeatedly to address that horrendous failure?
This is where the false equivalency can be demonstrated with great clarity. Just look at history and how HRC has been treated relative to those who preceded her.
46
241 Americans killed, 58 French killed October 28, 1983 Beirut Lebanon in Marine barracks bombing. 63 killed, April 18, 1983 in bombing of US embassy in Beirut. Ronald Reagan's watch.
1983 Americanlives don't matter to today's Republicans.
1983 Americanlives don't matter to today's Republicans.
20
Donald Trump should be referred to as, "Reality TV Star Donald Trump" and his campaign should be relegated to the Comedy Channel.
15
The sad reality is that most journalists are not very capable. It's easier and safer to be a referee than have the courage and tenacity to actually know something and ask appropriate questions. Case in point: Trump won't release his tax returns because of an supposed audit. "Mr. Trump, what are you being audited for? Shouldn't the public know whether it's something routine or troubling?"
Wow, that was sure hard.
Wow, that was sure hard.
17
Can someone ask IRS if they prohibit public release of tax records being audited?
Are all his back years of tax returns in process of auditing? That would be interesting to know.
Are these questions so difficult??
Are all his back years of tax returns in process of auditing? That would be interesting to know.
Are these questions so difficult??
9
You cover Donald Trump with courage, resolve and journalistic integrity. There has been none to be seen. Trump is a sniveling coward, and likes to hide under the skirts of Fox News, the shameful propaganda sewer. Donald Trump could not withstand sixty seconds of truthful inquiry into his fraudulent business history, his serious lack of knowledge, and his constant lying...but the media has criminally given him a shameful pass; shame on the cowardly main stream media. If Trump slithers into the White House, I lay blame first on the racist, hateful, ignorant, predominantly white electorate, and equally on an irresponsible media.
15
Devote more coverage to comparing the policies proposed by Clinton & Trump.
12
I suppose if you dehumanize your adversaries you don't have to deal with the fact that either A. You haven't presented your position in a manner worth believing, or B. You are wrong.
2
Your analogy to the Iraq war is correct. Sadly, I have no confidence the media has come close to having evolved enough to handle Trump, that is obvious. One example of many, is the hope that the debate moderators would do their job an hold Trump accountable for his lies. More sadly is the expectation that they will not. Most sadly, it probably doesn't matter.
7
Calling a lie a lie is not bias. It's fact. Donald trump argues that he was never for the Iraq invasion. That's a lie, one many trump has said over the course of the election
14
I just hope that it's not too little of the remedy too late in the process. That this is even a debate in the journalistic community is revealing. Media have given The Orange One so much free advertising and coverage of his propaganda that I don't think it's possible to over-correct. Don't let The Orange One dictate your script. In sports language, you have to call balls and strikes.
14
“Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts.” Daniel Patrick Moynihan
So while I may want to believe, however absurd it is, that DT will build a wall on the Mexican border, the FACT is that there is nothing a President can do to compel another country to build such a structure.
While I may want to believe that DT was on the side of the angels when it came to the war in Iraq, the FACT is that he was indeed in favor of it and said so numerous times. It’s easily checked.
While I may want to believe that DT will do great things for the economy, the FACT most definitely is that he declared bankruptcy numerous times and left hard-working small businesses in the lurch. And based on that fact, I should question his declared allegiance to working people. He has no history of it.
It saddens me that so many journalists don’t see it as their essential job to distinguish fact from fiction. If journalists only job is to repeat untruths, partial truths, and actual lies, why do we need them at all?
So while I may want to believe, however absurd it is, that DT will build a wall on the Mexican border, the FACT is that there is nothing a President can do to compel another country to build such a structure.
While I may want to believe that DT was on the side of the angels when it came to the war in Iraq, the FACT is that he was indeed in favor of it and said so numerous times. It’s easily checked.
While I may want to believe that DT will do great things for the economy, the FACT most definitely is that he declared bankruptcy numerous times and left hard-working small businesses in the lurch. And based on that fact, I should question his declared allegiance to working people. He has no history of it.
It saddens me that so many journalists don’t see it as their essential job to distinguish fact from fiction. If journalists only job is to repeat untruths, partial truths, and actual lies, why do we need them at all?
12
I have been railing about this to the times for the last 3 months, you are absolutely right and you are absolutely too late. You have had your journalist epiphany far to late to save yourself and in the process save your readers and the nation. You have allowed Trump to change the definition of what is acceptable behavior, once the rat is out of the bag it is impossible to get it back. We live in a new normal now and the country will never be the same, thanks for that. Oh yeah, that's sarcasm one of the other things you forgot to educate Trump about, when he was being cryptic about have Hillary killed, he was not being sarcastic.
11
I thank goodness every night that there are brilliant folks like Kristof to tell me what to think.
2
Contemporary reporting on politics is as shoddy as the FBI investigation of Hillary Clinton ---> incompetently, presumptuous.
1
Thanks for the interesting photo of Joseph McCarthy. Remember that, according to a recent article in the NYT, Donald Trump's main mentor as a young businessman was Roy Cohn, McCarthy's right-hand man during those hearings.
13
I agree with Mr. Kristof. But it's too little, too late. The press should have been doing its job from the beginning. Perhaps we would not have the two weakest and flawed candidates in my lifetime (Eisenhower's second term). Perhaps we could have had two serious and honest candidates, like John Kasich and Bernie Sanders. Now that would have been a good debate!
Too late for crying.
Too late for crying.
4
It's about time journalists of all stripes took this stand! If only this had happened 6 months ago. I hope your peers in cable news are paying attention and that it's not too late.
7
We know a lot about Hillary Clinton's upbringing, education and family life. Yet, nothing has been reported about Donald J. Trumps real upbringing: his history in school, his relationships/real opinions of peers and teachers , his interests and participation in school events and sports. his scholarship abilities, his grades, how he even graduated from high school, how he ever got into college? ! Nothing! Why his marriage to an American woman failed and why he marries models and foreign women.! Where is that psychological profile? How did his father treat his mother? Why did his family change their name from Drumpf to Trump? Where are those insights? Thank you.
11
To be fair to Mr. Kristof, he did write a column on March 5, 2016 expressing concerns about Mr. Trump called "Donald the Dangerous". I remembered it because of the title/headline and because I commented on it. The column began:
"IS there any scarier nightmare than President Donald J. Trump in a tense international crisis, indignant and impatient, with his sweaty finger on the nuclear trigger?"
I compared Mr. Trump to Gaius Baltar of the "Battlestar Galactica" TV remake series in that comment, and the reason I remember is b/c recently a friend and I had been discussing that not only was Mr. Trump TOTALLY Dr. Baltar but the entire election was now a parallel to Dr. Baltar getting elected and leading the human race to disaster in season 2 and the first part of season 3. The election even had a voting scandal. (Like we're going to have Russian hackers trying to mess with us!)
What I wrote in March was: "I can visualize a scene - like the one portrayed on the TV series Battlestar Galactica - of President Trump being warned of some grave danger. Similar to when the (wholly incompetent) President Gaius Baltar was warned of danger by Admiral William Adama:
Adama: "You're not listening."
Dr. Baltar: "I don't have to listen. I'm the President."
"IS there any scarier nightmare than President Donald J. Trump in a tense international crisis, indignant and impatient, with his sweaty finger on the nuclear trigger?"
I compared Mr. Trump to Gaius Baltar of the "Battlestar Galactica" TV remake series in that comment, and the reason I remember is b/c recently a friend and I had been discussing that not only was Mr. Trump TOTALLY Dr. Baltar but the entire election was now a parallel to Dr. Baltar getting elected and leading the human race to disaster in season 2 and the first part of season 3. The election even had a voting scandal. (Like we're going to have Russian hackers trying to mess with us!)
What I wrote in March was: "I can visualize a scene - like the one portrayed on the TV series Battlestar Galactica - of President Trump being warned of some grave danger. Similar to when the (wholly incompetent) President Gaius Baltar was warned of danger by Admiral William Adama:
Adama: "You're not listening."
Dr. Baltar: "I don't have to listen. I'm the President."
12
Do the organizers of this series of debates intend that they be debates in the best definition of the term, that it be a comparative examination of the candidates' positions, or are they at risk of allowing them to default to argument, misrepresentation, distraction and evasion?
What do they mean by moderator? Shall this person or group truly moderate the responses of the candidates by enforcing standard rules of debate, or are they by their questions only to prompt the candidates and then recuse themselves from oversight of the candidates' responses?
It would seem that especially given the records of this election's presidential campaigns, the role of moderator seems passive and insufficient to guaranteeing the public as direct as possible a debate of the issues and a presentation, admittedly limited, of the candidates' demeanor.
It may be argued (debated) that to the extent most appropriate the role of moderator be strengthened to resemble the function of a parliamentarian. It may be that beyond the most direct example of the well-respected Lincoln-Douglas debates, the organizers should look to how competitive academic and professional debates are controlled and made effective and worthwhile. For why should not the same measure of quality be brought to bear upon our presidential debates? Given what is at stake in this election, nothing less should be accepted, and about that there should be no debate.
What do they mean by moderator? Shall this person or group truly moderate the responses of the candidates by enforcing standard rules of debate, or are they by their questions only to prompt the candidates and then recuse themselves from oversight of the candidates' responses?
It would seem that especially given the records of this election's presidential campaigns, the role of moderator seems passive and insufficient to guaranteeing the public as direct as possible a debate of the issues and a presentation, admittedly limited, of the candidates' demeanor.
It may be argued (debated) that to the extent most appropriate the role of moderator be strengthened to resemble the function of a parliamentarian. It may be that beyond the most direct example of the well-respected Lincoln-Douglas debates, the organizers should look to how competitive academic and professional debates are controlled and made effective and worthwhile. For why should not the same measure of quality be brought to bear upon our presidential debates? Given what is at stake in this election, nothing less should be accepted, and about that there should be no debate.
6
If we get Trump as president, then obviously we must deserve this type of person. I doubt that the media can save us from ourselves. That he has gotten this far shows how little this country has really changed since the days of segregation and Jim Crow, not to mention incarcerating Japanese and Chinese Americans in WWII. Maybe we are kidding ourselves that we have joined the 21st century. This country may have cell phones and all kinds of jiffy digital toys but when it comes to governance and politics, we are still in the dark ages. As that 20th century sage (Pogo) said, "we have met the enemy and he is us".
10
One sentence stands out- "Our job is not stenography, but truth telling." I thought that was obvious but money-even with the media- seems to have made the truth a victim in dealing with trump.
6
I'm reminded of what a Panhandle of Texas banker told me of the time his Father caught him and his brother in a lie. He said. "You boys are just barely smart enough to remember the truth: you sure can't remember a lie". Trump probably doesn't remember all the lies he has told. The way to defeat Trump is to play his words back to him and give him limited coverage. Let Fox do the coverage then point out the Fox lies.
13
Obama has been our most thoughtful, intelligent, and articulate president in at least 50 years. Lots of people having seen it now want the very exact opposite and that is Trump. To call Trump a "liar" is correct in a very superficial and conventional sense but really misses the whole point of Trump. It's shocking that most NYT columnists are still using a conventional sense to analyze him and exposes the reality that NYT columnists aren't very keen observers of the human condition. The great media effort to discredit Trump just helps him.
6
Having read the article and many comments, I believe it is too little too late. The ads will drown out anything positive and revealing in the debates.
The media has won.
The media has won.
3
The greatest duty of the responsible media is in becoming an effective counterweight to talk radio, talk TV, and internet mavens peddling trash as truth.
We don't have to go back as far as Hitler for examples of the effects of editorial control of significant segments of the media by persons or groups with an extreme agenda, and these effects can be augmented passively by the "neutral" media engaging in uncritical repetitions of what is passing for "news".
Neutrality in reporting can never be achieved by mere accuracy in reciting what has been said or done. Freedom of speech should never shackle freedom of the press - the two are consistent. People have a right to say what they please, and the job of the press is to subject that speech to reasonable and critical analysis.
A dogmatic conservative narrative has been created which has not been effectively balanced. While balance is not the mission of the media, scrutiny is. When a liar and con man can be boosted into aura of authenticity - “he tells it like it is” - by “neutral” media coverage, somebody’s not doing their job.
We don't have to go back as far as Hitler for examples of the effects of editorial control of significant segments of the media by persons or groups with an extreme agenda, and these effects can be augmented passively by the "neutral" media engaging in uncritical repetitions of what is passing for "news".
Neutrality in reporting can never be achieved by mere accuracy in reciting what has been said or done. Freedom of speech should never shackle freedom of the press - the two are consistent. People have a right to say what they please, and the job of the press is to subject that speech to reasonable and critical analysis.
A dogmatic conservative narrative has been created which has not been effectively balanced. While balance is not the mission of the media, scrutiny is. When a liar and con man can be boosted into aura of authenticity - “he tells it like it is” - by “neutral” media coverage, somebody’s not doing their job.
11
The Hillary campaign should suspend the debate until Trump shows his tax returns.
6
The average American is ignorant! Yes they are stupid! They believe that Trump will change things. Will he build a Wall? No! Is he going to make America great again? It's already great! If they don't believe it, these are the people that should emigrate to Somalia. Is he going to bring jobs back? Yeah, and monkeys fly. Modern technology has obsoleted the need for unskilled labor.
These are truly the people that believe Trump will save the day. Look at college graduates, they can't find a decent paying job or get healthcare insurance because corporations are only concerned with their shareholders. Every candidate has their flaws. Most Americans drink a candidates kool-aid only to become disenchanted somewhere around year three of a first Presidential term. Yet, if I have to choose between sanity and insanity.... well I'll take my chances with sanity...hands down!
These are truly the people that believe Trump will save the day. Look at college graduates, they can't find a decent paying job or get healthcare insurance because corporations are only concerned with their shareholders. Every candidate has their flaws. Most Americans drink a candidates kool-aid only to become disenchanted somewhere around year three of a first Presidential term. Yet, if I have to choose between sanity and insanity.... well I'll take my chances with sanity...hands down!
6
The biggest lie I can imagine coming from Trump would be his taking the Oath of Office. It makes my skin crawl to even try to picture it.
12
There once was a fellow named Don
Who was good at the art of the con.
So, don't be a chump;
Make sure that this Trump
Post November is long woebegone.
Who was good at the art of the con.
So, don't be a chump;
Make sure that this Trump
Post November is long woebegone.
9
I have one question, Mr Kristof: If Donald Trump is a charlatan then what is Hillary Clinton? Let's see, just in recent years Ms Clinton, as Sec of State, ignored State Department policy in setting up her own private server from which she sent and received classified material. That selfish and concealing stunt put American national security at high risk. Then when Congress subpoenaed the emails she had her team destroy them. Such actions are beyond charlatan. They are criminal and real and far exceed the harm of any superficial blustery of Donald Trump.
7
"...Trump seems to be a Teflon candidate..." That used to be called greasy. You're wasting words and column inches. TELL IT LIKE IT IS AND STOP BEING IMPRESSED WITH MONEY!!!
5
"In the debate about invading Iraq, news organizations scrupulously quoted each side..."
No they didn't even do that.
97% of US media sources cheer-led for the pro-war side.
The anti-war side was sidelined and ignored or, if given a voice, ridiculed as naive and denounced and unpatriotic.
This very paper had to issue an apology for not being more vigilant in serving as an echo chamber for administration lies about WMD in Iraq.
So, no Mr. Kristof, the Fourth Estate has long abdicated its duty to inform the public in favor of stenography in return for "access" to the corridors of power.
No they didn't even do that.
97% of US media sources cheer-led for the pro-war side.
The anti-war side was sidelined and ignored or, if given a voice, ridiculed as naive and denounced and unpatriotic.
This very paper had to issue an apology for not being more vigilant in serving as an echo chamber for administration lies about WMD in Iraq.
So, no Mr. Kristof, the Fourth Estate has long abdicated its duty to inform the public in favor of stenography in return for "access" to the corridors of power.
14
The only people thinking about how to cover Trump are the media members who hate him. And what they are thinking about is how to cover him in order for their audiences to reject him and vote for Clinton. Personally, I think it will be hard to cover him in a more biased way than they have so far, but the extremes they have gone to in rejecting any fairness in reportage continue to surprise. What they seem to be unable to understand or accept is that, perhaps 90% of Trump's supporters don't read or listen to their elitist, globalist publications. After all the Washington Post wouldn't exist, if Bezos hadn't bought it for $1 and the Times is only alive by selling off its "non-core" assets. Both are, in some ways, recipients of the mamma "welfare" that the Democrat politicians thrive on providing voters. The lack of success of these publications is due to the fact that only serve the interests of the small number of elitist, globalist readers.
So, their small audience will hear about the hand-wringing faux exercise of figuring out just how to cover Trump more dishonestly and negatively. But, it won't effect the vote one whit.
So, their small audience will hear about the hand-wringing faux exercise of figuring out just how to cover Trump more dishonestly and negatively. But, it won't effect the vote one whit.
3
To keep it short: your understanding of journalism is based on corporate success, not what the fifth column supposed to stand for. If commercial success is the operative word, then you are not successful when compared to Denmark, Sweden, and Germany, etc.
4
Bravo, Mr Kristoff. I wish you had written this a year ago. But I guess we were all too busy reassuring ourselves that Trump could never get the nomination, weren't we?
6
Thank you, Nicholas Kristof for saying it: "..; to expose charlatans is not partisanship, but simply good journalism." Reporters should remain biased against lies.
11
Little bit late for you to be figuring this out!!!! Thanks media for creating this monster.
9
The other major mistake Clinton supporters are making is to believe that all voters want the same thing--a leader who will make the country prosperous. In this case, Trump supporters want above all someone who caters to their ego fantasies, and legitimizes them through the highest office in the land, and they don't care whether such a priority weakens the country or not. I don't believe any amount of fact-checking will stop Trump. His supporters are determined to vote for anyone who infuriates liberals and the educated elite. This is the one area where they feel empowered against those that look down on them or ignore them, and the sheer thrill of having a Presidential candidate who turns their fantastical self-image into TV reality is too powerful to make them think earnestly about what his presidency would mean for their actual reality. It's the matter with Kansas all over again. And we are talking about a very vulnerable swath of the population who, like Bernie supporters, focus only on what these other targeted people are going to lose, that which was unjustly gained in their eyes--not what they themselves are going to lose. They don't realize that they will become even bigger losers, following a dishonest salesman like Trump.
11
The asymmetry gets in your way, Mr. Kristof.
Republicans are driven entirely by their sharia and belief; to be a republican today is to unshakably believe in a Kenyan, Muslim Obama responsible for 9/11 and ISIS. And this belief is wholly more rational than the others that the republican ayatollahs espouse with a hint of irony (e.g., espouse fiscal conservatism while running up debt, espouse America first while hollowing out American manufacturing; espouse big tent while appealing to basic bigotry of masses).
Democrats are tireless when it comes to pointing to the absurdity of it all. They think facts matter in America when they don't. They act as if there is a referee who examines facts on both sides and makes a ruling - when there is no such thing. These guys think they are in a movie where the good guys win, regardless.
Fighting fire with fire would mean espousing their own heady, effective dogma based on its appeal and not its factual quotient. This is a skill totally lacking among democrats. You see, they are better than everyone else, and somehow above it all (and lose heroically).
American journalists are either espousing republican sharia, or have imbibed deeply on moral and intellectual relativism. They devote more energy to Benghazi and emails, than to Trump's plan to deport 11 million people, and ban Muslims. As if they are the same in terms of consequences.
I hope I have explained why you cannot cover a charlatan like Trump.
Kalidan
Republicans are driven entirely by their sharia and belief; to be a republican today is to unshakably believe in a Kenyan, Muslim Obama responsible for 9/11 and ISIS. And this belief is wholly more rational than the others that the republican ayatollahs espouse with a hint of irony (e.g., espouse fiscal conservatism while running up debt, espouse America first while hollowing out American manufacturing; espouse big tent while appealing to basic bigotry of masses).
Democrats are tireless when it comes to pointing to the absurdity of it all. They think facts matter in America when they don't. They act as if there is a referee who examines facts on both sides and makes a ruling - when there is no such thing. These guys think they are in a movie where the good guys win, regardless.
Fighting fire with fire would mean espousing their own heady, effective dogma based on its appeal and not its factual quotient. This is a skill totally lacking among democrats. You see, they are better than everyone else, and somehow above it all (and lose heroically).
American journalists are either espousing republican sharia, or have imbibed deeply on moral and intellectual relativism. They devote more energy to Benghazi and emails, than to Trump's plan to deport 11 million people, and ban Muslims. As if they are the same in terms of consequences.
I hope I have explained why you cannot cover a charlatan like Trump.
Kalidan
11
The New York Times helped lead the nation to war in Iraq based on Judith Miller's "flawed reporting." You allude to the bad reporting in the run-up to that war -- which, guess what, a whole lot of sensible Americans knew would not be a cake walk, though our voices were drowned out as the media and government beat the drums. It wasn't generic "bad reporting." It was the Times' bad reporting.
7
Nicholas, I can't hear you over the cacophony of hypocrisy.
“Often those that criticize others reveal what he himself lacks.”
― Shannon L. Alder
"You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
--- (Author screened due to concerns over censorship)
Found this online, what to do with newspapers that have served their purpose:
1. Use newspapers to stuff things. For example, newspapers make excellent stuffing for such things as a scarecrow on Halloween or as fake appendages or body parts for a costume.
Apropos... stuffing scarecrows and creating fake appendages.
“Often those that criticize others reveal what he himself lacks.”
― Shannon L. Alder
"You hypocrite! First take the beam out of your own eye, and then you will see clearly to remove the speck from your brother's eye."
--- (Author screened due to concerns over censorship)
Found this online, what to do with newspapers that have served their purpose:
1. Use newspapers to stuff things. For example, newspapers make excellent stuffing for such things as a scarecrow on Halloween or as fake appendages or body parts for a costume.
Apropos... stuffing scarecrows and creating fake appendages.
I've been saying for awhile it's time for members of the media, not just the editorialists, to have their "Cronkite" moment. Even the nightly news people, even the cable news people. It's not about their careers it's about our country.
A Cronkite moment would be nice but its not possible. Its way to late and besides no one would even recognize it.
How has it come to pass that so close to the election of the most powerful person in the world, one journalist has to exhort most of our journalists to do their jobs of protecting Americans from a lying lunatic.
Our media outlets and journalists have given Trump > $2 billion in free political advertising. Far from pointing out his lies, they have promoted his lies by repeatedly reporting them without challenge, by giving him a stage and the spotlight when he lied and attacked opponents. Journalists have not even insisted that Trump answer substantive questions as part of his job interview for President.
In sports terms, journalists have no runs, no hits and all errors. Mr. Kristof has to go back to the 1950s to point out that they did have one journalist, Edward R. Murrow, in their Hall of Fame who challenged a dangerous demagogue. How has it come to pass 70 years later that reporting lies is considered reporting?
How pathetic! Most workers who say "it's not my job", shouldn't be in that job.
Our media outlets and journalists have given Trump > $2 billion in free political advertising. Far from pointing out his lies, they have promoted his lies by repeatedly reporting them without challenge, by giving him a stage and the spotlight when he lied and attacked opponents. Journalists have not even insisted that Trump answer substantive questions as part of his job interview for President.
In sports terms, journalists have no runs, no hits and all errors. Mr. Kristof has to go back to the 1950s to point out that they did have one journalist, Edward R. Murrow, in their Hall of Fame who challenged a dangerous demagogue. How has it come to pass 70 years later that reporting lies is considered reporting?
How pathetic! Most workers who say "it's not my job", shouldn't be in that job.
4
where are the ED murrows and walter Cronkites???Not one of the news people have 1/10th of the guts to outirght challenge DT. ASK and repeat asking the same ?s that DT slyly evades. You wonder why Americans have no longer the trust of anyone in the media.You say,"our job is truth telling".Horse hockey.Take off your coats, roll up those nicely starched white shirtsleeves and get down to outright honest questions that DEMAND honest answers.I've listened many times to Ed Murrow's radio casts from London during the blitz. THAT man wasn't afraid to put his life on the front line to get the truth to America. Not a single person covering DT has the honesty to earn the money they are being paid. And that is why I admire only one man in the news field.. And it sure ain't you MR K
4
Dear Nicholas Kristof and the NYTimes,
The fundamental challenge of USA journalism today is what is at the core of what is fueling the angry chaos in American. News organisations are compromised by their company's stockholders. Journalists are no longer servants of democracy, but slaves of the bottomline, not truth, nor facts.
The fundamental challenge of USA journalism today is what is at the core of what is fueling the angry chaos in American. News organisations are compromised by their company's stockholders. Journalists are no longer servants of democracy, but slaves of the bottomline, not truth, nor facts.
4
Kristof: "Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling. As we move to the debates, let’s remember that to expose charlatans is not partisanship, but simply good journalism."
You are correct, Nicholas Kristof, but keep this in mind: Trump supporters are unfazed by facts. Is that not one major reason he prevailed in the Republican primaries? If he defeats Clinton, a major reason for his victory will, again, be that voters have not been fazed by facts, unfortunately.
You are correct, Nicholas Kristof, but keep this in mind: Trump supporters are unfazed by facts. Is that not one major reason he prevailed in the Republican primaries? If he defeats Clinton, a major reason for his victory will, again, be that voters have not been fazed by facts, unfortunately.
4
Does your advice for covering manipulative demagogues apply to Obama as well? Because if so your advice is 8 years too late.
5
That might be President Charlatan to everyone soon. Morning polls show the race virtually tied, and Trump ahead in crucial states like Ohio and NC. I thought he would get no more votes than the tiny percent of those that voted for him in the Republican Primaries. I am 71 years old - I do not know my own country anymore.
6
Thank you NYT and its reporters that no longer calling Trumps lies as falsehood but lies. he lies so much and so often that the lines that even he believes in his lies.
2
Not difficult to check the facts, POLIFACT has the list.
2
How to cover a charlatan like Trump?
One suggestion:
While referring to Trump's 'lies' don't show your bias by referring to Clinton's 'evasiveness'.
In this case what is appropriate for the goose is appropriate for the gander.
One suggestion:
While referring to Trump's 'lies' don't show your bias by referring to Clinton's 'evasiveness'.
In this case what is appropriate for the goose is appropriate for the gander.
5
Too often, the journalists themselves are partisan charlatans.
2
Sadly, this damage is done. You can't now undo the endless disingenuous coverage of the minor email issues led by once great papers like the New York Times left the nation with the vague sense that something Clinton did was somehow untrustworthy.
3
It is correct to point fingers at the media for the false equivalence (or worse - e.g., Fox) and for that matter, the GOP that has progressively made fiction a staple since Reagan.
Not to let the media off the hook, but here are two observations: As absurd as Trump can be, pretty much the entire field of GOP candidates were dealing in fiction. So after a year of trying to outdo each other with absurdity, the most absurd won the primary. It had become a contest of who was the best liar.
Which leads to the second observation, actually a question - is it that difficult to see and accept how dishonest the man is? He got to this point because he is the best liar. A day without some Trump absurdity is unusual. Unlike Clinton, who is a normal, boring politician with regard to honesty, though quite exceptional in other important ways. But somehow the picture is reversed. How is it possible that half the country is quite prepared to go through the looking glass?
Somehow trading in dishonesty has become reality.
“This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy’s methods to keep silent.”
Not to let the media off the hook, but here are two observations: As absurd as Trump can be, pretty much the entire field of GOP candidates were dealing in fiction. So after a year of trying to outdo each other with absurdity, the most absurd won the primary. It had become a contest of who was the best liar.
Which leads to the second observation, actually a question - is it that difficult to see and accept how dishonest the man is? He got to this point because he is the best liar. A day without some Trump absurdity is unusual. Unlike Clinton, who is a normal, boring politician with regard to honesty, though quite exceptional in other important ways. But somehow the picture is reversed. How is it possible that half the country is quite prepared to go through the looking glass?
Somehow trading in dishonesty has become reality.
“This is no time for men who oppose Senator McCarthy’s methods to keep silent.”
5
Part of the problem was in the early stages of the campaign Trump made reporters' jobs too easy. (Still does, I guess, but they're finally waking up to the possible ramifications of their laziness.) I think the press honestly thought they could just report exactly what the man said, and it was so self-evidently ridiculous that if they reported it without comment, it would speak for itself.
I really hope the Times's newfound urgency on this matter isn't too little, too late. If Trump is elected it's going to be another scar on the Times's reputation, like their cheerleading of the Iraq war. The other problem is of course the mindless quest for "balance," which the Public Editor thought she could disingenuously champion and apparently learned better after generating a huge hornet's nest of readers' ire.
I really hope the Times's newfound urgency on this matter isn't too little, too late. If Trump is elected it's going to be another scar on the Times's reputation, like their cheerleading of the Iraq war. The other problem is of course the mindless quest for "balance," which the Public Editor thought she could disingenuously champion and apparently learned better after generating a huge hornet's nest of readers' ire.
2
After readding many of these comments it is obvious the general public has a perception problem in distnguishing facts from editorial comment and downright propaganda.
There have mang good fact telling articles about HRC and her unability to deal with the press in a non defensive and protective manner. But according to many this makes her untrustworthy. Pinning that epitth on her has been the goal of the right and it has been very effective. Well the propagandists are winning the war of the words.
The more crutial out come of this election is that it will not be a referendum on a vision for the country. The gop and the corprortatists will continue to equate personal freedom with free unregulated markets and this is a religious cause.Good governance and civic dury will continue to struggle.
There have mang good fact telling articles about HRC and her unability to deal with the press in a non defensive and protective manner. But according to many this makes her untrustworthy. Pinning that epitth on her has been the goal of the right and it has been very effective. Well the propagandists are winning the war of the words.
The more crutial out come of this election is that it will not be a referendum on a vision for the country. The gop and the corprortatists will continue to equate personal freedom with free unregulated markets and this is a religious cause.Good governance and civic dury will continue to struggle.
1
I see that Mr Kristoff let's himself, and by extension the NY Times, off lightly. He invokes the specter of the run-up to the Iraq invasion (he still refers to it as a 'war') when Judith Miller's planted stories were being published on the front page. At the same time the McClatchey news service was reporting reality, as was the New York Review of Books. Mr Kristoff mentions in passing that no reporter believed the lies of the Bush administration: then why didn't he call them on those lies? Why has the Times waited still not reported with any accuracy on the swift boating of Hillary Clinton? Why does every piece on the lies of Trump begin with some version of "Of course Mrs Clinton can't be trusted to tell the truth..."?
3
"Skeptics note that more rigorous coverage might not make a difference; Only 6 percent of Americans say they have a great deal of confidence in the press. After all, few facts are clearer than that President Obama was born in the United States, yet only 62 percent of American voters say he was born here. Facts may be stubborn things, but so are myths."
Pathetic. The press didn't try very hard to dispel the myth, nor did they make any effort to point out that simply, even though the press is free to publish whatever they so choose, including lies, this is the press of the United States, the so-called 4th Pillar of our democratic-republican system and in the United States we do not denigrate the Office of the President, Congress or the Supreme Court with such outright lies.
Similar to, as you point out, the press facilitated the 2nd Iraq War: you didn't try. Perhaps the press eventually fully believed and absorbed the "liberal media bias" and in an attempt to prove otherwise, utterly failed our country as an institution. Pray that the voters save us all and elect Clinton.
Last note, has any newspaper or magazine countered the phrase that seems to be one of Trump's more effective barbs: "Crooked Hillary Clinton"?
Pathetic. The press didn't try very hard to dispel the myth, nor did they make any effort to point out that simply, even though the press is free to publish whatever they so choose, including lies, this is the press of the United States, the so-called 4th Pillar of our democratic-republican system and in the United States we do not denigrate the Office of the President, Congress or the Supreme Court with such outright lies.
Similar to, as you point out, the press facilitated the 2nd Iraq War: you didn't try. Perhaps the press eventually fully believed and absorbed the "liberal media bias" and in an attempt to prove otherwise, utterly failed our country as an institution. Pray that the voters save us all and elect Clinton.
Last note, has any newspaper or magazine countered the phrase that seems to be one of Trump's more effective barbs: "Crooked Hillary Clinton"?
3
When my parents lived in a large Florida city and I visited them I was appalled at the poor quality of the "news" both local and national that was available to them. I can only say the same for my sister who lived in Indiana for many years. They had access to and read the NY Times. Their neighbors did not bother to read a "NY newspaper."
It is more than disheartening to see that in the South and the Midwest the dearth of good journalism and of people to avail themselves of adequate information in times of change and political and economic upheaval here and elsewhere reveals itself in the appalling ignorance of facts by a great swath of the public. Democracy cannot be maintained when people and their representatives are bathed in and believe ideas and "facts" disconnected from reality.
It is more than disheartening to see that in the South and the Midwest the dearth of good journalism and of people to avail themselves of adequate information in times of change and political and economic upheaval here and elsewhere reveals itself in the appalling ignorance of facts by a great swath of the public. Democracy cannot be maintained when people and their representatives are bathed in and believe ideas and "facts" disconnected from reality.
4
It is well known that a very large number of Americans own guns, enjoy going to beauty contests, wrestling matches and auto races, subscribe to the theory that the moon landings were faked and sleep in their underwear.
This will be a very tough audience for Mrs. Clinton to impress.
This will be a very tough audience for Mrs. Clinton to impress.
3
Trump has appare3ntly asked Gen. Flowers to sit in on the upcoming debates. Perhaps someone should also ask some of the small-business types that the Trump outfit has cheated out of payments, the fellow who hit the hole-in-one and got stiffed on the prize and maybe a relative of one of the elephants that Trump's son had shot. Could make for an interesting evening.
I am sorry, but the MSM has completely undermined its last shreds of credibility this year.
The gate keepers have lost their influence already. They have thrown everything they have at Trump and yet he is still in essentially a tie with their chosen candidate.
They have thrown aside all pretense of objectivity and professionalism and become propagandists.
They NYT endorsed Clinton over a year ago, they just did it in the news section instead of the editorial pages.
Personally, I think they are freaking out and writing this stuff because they are terrified that they have lost their power to influence. Nobody listens anymore. People go to other places like Twitter to get their news raw and unfiltered.
And they wonder why nobody wants to pay for newspapers. Would you actually PAY for CNN, MSNBC or Fox if they did not come as part of your cable bundle?
I am really sorry to have to say that I do not think that the majority of Americans any longer respect the press. In fact, I think they distrust it to a point that they almost act out against the agenda it pushes.
This is a real loss for the American people. Unless the MSM does some serious soul searching, makes serious efforts to get back to being professional, I do not see it surviving. The web will kill them off.
The gate keepers have lost their influence already. They have thrown everything they have at Trump and yet he is still in essentially a tie with their chosen candidate.
They have thrown aside all pretense of objectivity and professionalism and become propagandists.
They NYT endorsed Clinton over a year ago, they just did it in the news section instead of the editorial pages.
Personally, I think they are freaking out and writing this stuff because they are terrified that they have lost their power to influence. Nobody listens anymore. People go to other places like Twitter to get their news raw and unfiltered.
And they wonder why nobody wants to pay for newspapers. Would you actually PAY for CNN, MSNBC or Fox if they did not come as part of your cable bundle?
I am really sorry to have to say that I do not think that the majority of Americans any longer respect the press. In fact, I think they distrust it to a point that they almost act out against the agenda it pushes.
This is a real loss for the American people. Unless the MSM does some serious soul searching, makes serious efforts to get back to being professional, I do not see it surviving. The web will kill them off.
2
I think the media reports too, too much about Donald Trump. He gets far too much coverage. Just saying another lie is enough.
Yes, what should a journalist do when one party has abandoned reality, when the facts themselves are therefore partisan?
Duh. Report the facts.
Duh. Report the facts.
2
"If a known con artist peddles a potion that he claims will make people lose 25 pounds and enjoy a better sex life, we don’t just quote the man and a critic; we find ways to signal to readers that he’s a fraud."
Even here, I don't understand the delicacy. "Signal" to readers? You use this weasel-ish word a couple of times. You're undermining your own point. If the person is demonstrably a fraud, why "find ways to signal" this? Why not REPORT this?
"Yet I can see how the endless media coverage of Clinton’s email evasiveness might incline some casual voters to perceive Trump as the more honest figure."
People perceive Trump as "more honest" because he shoots his mouth off without thinking and gets away with it. Some people confuse that with honesty. It's not that they necessarily think what he's saying is accurate - it's more that they wish they too could get away with just blabbing whatever rude stupid thought comes into their head without consequences. They're vicariously enjoying Trump's bad-boy-in-the-fifth-grade routine ("I can say whatever I want, it's a free country").
"In watching the campaign coverage this year, I’ve sometimes had the same distressing feeling I felt in the run-up to the war in Iraq — that we in the media were greasing the skids to a bad outcome for our country."
Yep.
Even here, I don't understand the delicacy. "Signal" to readers? You use this weasel-ish word a couple of times. You're undermining your own point. If the person is demonstrably a fraud, why "find ways to signal" this? Why not REPORT this?
"Yet I can see how the endless media coverage of Clinton’s email evasiveness might incline some casual voters to perceive Trump as the more honest figure."
People perceive Trump as "more honest" because he shoots his mouth off without thinking and gets away with it. Some people confuse that with honesty. It's not that they necessarily think what he's saying is accurate - it's more that they wish they too could get away with just blabbing whatever rude stupid thought comes into their head without consequences. They're vicariously enjoying Trump's bad-boy-in-the-fifth-grade routine ("I can say whatever I want, it's a free country").
"In watching the campaign coverage this year, I’ve sometimes had the same distressing feeling I felt in the run-up to the war in Iraq — that we in the media were greasing the skids to a bad outcome for our country."
Yep.
4
"Our job is to share with our audiences what we know."
Then why haven't you shared the fact that 40 percent of State Department advisory appointments during Hillary Clinton’s time as Secretary of State went to her donors? Or that these same donors had little or no apparent qualification for their advisory board appointments, including Hillary's $100,000 Clinton donation bundler and friend Kaki Hockersmith, who ended up on the United States National Commission on UNESCO. (UNESCO is a global humanitarian organization; Hockersmith is an interior designer by trade.)
Now THAT'S the definition of a charlatan.
Then why haven't you shared the fact that 40 percent of State Department advisory appointments during Hillary Clinton’s time as Secretary of State went to her donors? Or that these same donors had little or no apparent qualification for their advisory board appointments, including Hillary's $100,000 Clinton donation bundler and friend Kaki Hockersmith, who ended up on the United States National Commission on UNESCO. (UNESCO is a global humanitarian organization; Hockersmith is an interior designer by trade.)
Now THAT'S the definition of a charlatan.
1
It is not true that the media scrupulously reported both sides in the run-up to the Iraq War. If it had we might have avoided that mess. Instead it reported "news" by echoing the lies that justified it. UN weapons inspectors got short shrift on TV and in the best news sources save one -- USA Today whose editors properly cast doubt on all the false claims of WMD. That is a lesson that we should not forget, especially trusted voices from the NYT. If the noses of liars grew longer Cheney, Wolfowitz and gang would certainly occupy the same place as Trump
3
A majority of Canadian daily newspapers are owned by a New York based hedge fund.
Is the ownership of the media somehow important in determining the degree of enlightenment displayed by the reader/viewer ? Charles Dickens was convinced that this was the case during his 1842 tour of the United States. All newspapers he read at that time only reflected the narrow monetary and political interest of the owner.
It was not an appreciably better journalistic scene by the time of his second visit, a quarter of a century on, or today: "Yet I can see how the endless media coverage of Clinton’s email evasiveness might incline some casual voters to perceive Trump as the more honest figure. "
The author is being very kind and tactful.
Is the ownership of the media somehow important in determining the degree of enlightenment displayed by the reader/viewer ? Charles Dickens was convinced that this was the case during his 1842 tour of the United States. All newspapers he read at that time only reflected the narrow monetary and political interest of the owner.
It was not an appreciably better journalistic scene by the time of his second visit, a quarter of a century on, or today: "Yet I can see how the endless media coverage of Clinton’s email evasiveness might incline some casual voters to perceive Trump as the more honest figure. "
The author is being very kind and tactful.
1
The role of the free press as our "fourth estate" is to protect the people from lying politicians. We don't have time to fact check every lie. That is the job of the free press. It is also the reason why the first thing that despots and fascists do when they take power is to get rid of the "free" press.
5
Hmmm. An article about Donald Trump's "duplicity" that begins with a huge masthead photo of the press surrounding Joseph McCarthy.
And WHO exactly is the charlatan here, Mr. Kristof?
And WHO exactly is the charlatan here, Mr. Kristof?
A "lie" based on misrepresentation of a verifiable fact is different from a "lie" based on an outlandish claim that something will happen in the future.. In the first case, Trump has clearly been lying when he claims he saw "thousands of Muslims" in Jersey City celebrating after 9/ll. To that, the moderator should ask, "What evidence do you have for that claim?" If Trump's answer is evasive, the moderator should follow up with questions about specifics - e.g. where exactly the "celebrations" were taking place, where Trump was when he saw them, were there other witnesses to the scene, and so on. In the second case, the moderator needs to challenge Trump's boast that "Mexico will pay for the wall" by asking how he can be so certain of that and what he would do if Mexico refuses to pay for the wall, as the Mexican president has recently said. Better for Trump's own answers to reveal the falseness of his statements.than for the moderator to say, "That's false," or that's "not true."
1
Trump need merely seem not loony to "win". Which is fair dues for a campaign that paints him as a freak when he is about in the middle of the American bell curve.
Things that he should bring to the debate? A pocket dictionary to wave around as he bats back race-ism and "xenophobe" charges. A picture of the woman and her baby that definitely were NOT kicked out of a rally, though no one ran that clip in the same nitely noose spots they repeatedly ran the FALSE story. & so on...
But his big focus should be on war, the one that cost thousands of US- Gold Star- servicemen, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, many more of both broken in body and/or mind, and trillions in debt for NOTHING.
& it is not just about "boots on the ground" vide Libya AND Syria.
He needs to keep the focus that Hillary is either a FOOL who bought a bogus tale, or instead used that fake charge to get what she and her people were on record long before as wanting: Regime overthrow.
War liars are the worst class of "charlatan", aren't they?
Things that he should bring to the debate? A pocket dictionary to wave around as he bats back race-ism and "xenophobe" charges. A picture of the woman and her baby that definitely were NOT kicked out of a rally, though no one ran that clip in the same nitely noose spots they repeatedly ran the FALSE story. & so on...
But his big focus should be on war, the one that cost thousands of US- Gold Star- servicemen, hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, many more of both broken in body and/or mind, and trillions in debt for NOTHING.
& it is not just about "boots on the ground" vide Libya AND Syria.
He needs to keep the focus that Hillary is either a FOOL who bought a bogus tale, or instead used that fake charge to get what she and her people were on record long before as wanting: Regime overthrow.
War liars are the worst class of "charlatan", aren't they?
All politicians lie without restraint. That's the baseline, and yes, it is despicable. However, to say that Trump lying about whether he initially supported the Iraq war or not (something which cannot be proven or disproven) is worse than Clinton who may say more factual things but had her hard drive bleached to conceal personal communications is a stretch. Deceptive actions are far more sinister to the public than exaggerated words or being loose with facts, which we've all come to expect from candidates for president.
2
We miss the point if we only focus on Trump's lying. The question is why is he so effective? He is an illusionist, a man who promises the 'small guy' a voice for his discontent. He is their ally against the 'enemies' identified by Rush Limbaugh and FOX NEWS. The deprived, abysmally educated, socially and educationally and economically disenfranchised complain the Blacks and the 'others' are getting what they want. Trump plays on racism and ignorance and bigotry. He fashions himself the neighborhood bully who will do and say anything that will get the small guy what he wants. He plays on their envy of the 'other'. Their ignorance and bigotry offers himself the chance as a con to promise them the dream that should be theirs. Without education and perspective they will let in another wolf of WALL STREET who will end our democracy and hand it over completely to the elite and the hawks who believe we are entitled rulers of the universe. Trump in turn is cynically used for the advantage of those who care not for the many but only for their own freedom to exploit and control with no scrutiny nor restraint. Trump is a proto-dictator who will destroy democracy.
3
Can the debates steer the Titanic away from iceberg Trump?
I hope so, yet my sense of impending doom grows unabated. The next headline I expect to see: "God Parts Clouds to Warn his Children that Trump is Satan; Trump Supporters Scoff and Point to Hillary's Flaws."
In this election season, as my now-constant anxiety moves up and down with Trump's poll numbers; as I awaken each morning dreading the news sites, making deals with myself about how long I can cower in ignorance before clicking; as I am progressively more blunted and dissociative in the face of the latest unhinged Trump policy proposal, insult or lie, I have realized that the problem is not simply that Trump suffers from severe mental disorder. It's that he's given me one.
I hope so, yet my sense of impending doom grows unabated. The next headline I expect to see: "God Parts Clouds to Warn his Children that Trump is Satan; Trump Supporters Scoff and Point to Hillary's Flaws."
In this election season, as my now-constant anxiety moves up and down with Trump's poll numbers; as I awaken each morning dreading the news sites, making deals with myself about how long I can cower in ignorance before clicking; as I am progressively more blunted and dissociative in the face of the latest unhinged Trump policy proposal, insult or lie, I have realized that the problem is not simply that Trump suffers from severe mental disorder. It's that he's given me one.
The mainstream press should do some self reflection and be humbled by the public's lack of trust, taking it as a serious indicator that it is doing a horrible job. Why? For one, it feels it is way more important than it is. And it needs to get out of the way rather than imagine that it is the way, the only way, to keep the public informed. Simply report the news of the day, including whatever Trump said or did, then cease and move on rather than feature him constantly in every venue and "analyze" ad nauseum every breath he takes. He's been given more free press than anyone in history and "exposing his lies" is not media courage, it is just more free coverage that delights and strengthens his base. Physician heal thyself.
1
Nicholas, you're forgiven for having to use the way too kind term "charlatan." Charlatans, the world over, are insulted. YOU are prohibited from using more honestly descriptive words. Like racist, homophobe, religionist, white nationalist, woman abuser, liar, tax evader, adulterer, criminal, the most dangerous individual to ever seek the office of president of the United States. Only WE readers are entitled to call him what he is.
3
There is no mystery here. GOP and Trump have swiftboated and obstructed the President for nearly eight years while doing the same to Hillary who has even more baggage to explain and unpack than Obama. No presidential candidate has ever run the FOIA /public records gauntlet after serving in a prior administration. GOP has used those rules to lynch Hillary and she fell in the trap with a private server and multiple private devices used for semi-official business.
Trump has no such handicap and has cleverly kept his dirty laundry from hindering his prospects. It is excused by the innocent sheep in the GOP as "just business" practices. His use of twitter is applauded by gullible millenials. Every terrorist attack and protest of police killing of Black men plays into Trump's hands.
We have two flawed candidates who each need to convince the public they can be trusted. Hillary has to overcome sexism, bigotry of those who congenitally hated Obama, GOP obstructionism and the appeal of a strong fascist leader who is an outsider. I am not sure that Trump's intellect or ability to handle complex issues facing a President will make a difference to the Trump cultists.The stains the GOP put on Hillary's reputation will not wash out. she is a deeply stained candidate who is qualified for the job, but those stains distract the low intellect voters, and Trump will use that to his advantage.. Not much of a hurdle for Trump in these debates. Just create more stains.
Trump has no such handicap and has cleverly kept his dirty laundry from hindering his prospects. It is excused by the innocent sheep in the GOP as "just business" practices. His use of twitter is applauded by gullible millenials. Every terrorist attack and protest of police killing of Black men plays into Trump's hands.
We have two flawed candidates who each need to convince the public they can be trusted. Hillary has to overcome sexism, bigotry of those who congenitally hated Obama, GOP obstructionism and the appeal of a strong fascist leader who is an outsider. I am not sure that Trump's intellect or ability to handle complex issues facing a President will make a difference to the Trump cultists.The stains the GOP put on Hillary's reputation will not wash out. she is a deeply stained candidate who is qualified for the job, but those stains distract the low intellect voters, and Trump will use that to his advantage.. Not much of a hurdle for Trump in these debates. Just create more stains.
This late in the game. Those voters who do not already see that Trump is a hypocrite, an egomaniac, a charlatan, a serial liar and a con-man, a racist bigot and a woman hater by now, have insulated themselves from the usual sources of truth and accurate information.
They are not influenced by the Times or the Post or PBS or NPR or newspaper editorials. Their truth comes from Fox News and hate radio 24/7 and televised Trump rallies and interviews; all free advertising. All these folks hear is Trump’s lies.
If you tell them the truth they just hear “la la la la la la la,” Trump is gunna build a wall and Mexico will pay for it and what about those emails which disqualify Clinton. What America needs is a businessman. If he loses the election will have been rigged. Trump lies repeated as fact.
All of this notwithstanding the press should not be stenographers nor bipartisan where the fate of the nation is concerned. There are still a number of voters who have not made up their minds. Earn your paychecks. Don’t be like the GOP in Congress. Do your job.
They are not influenced by the Times or the Post or PBS or NPR or newspaper editorials. Their truth comes from Fox News and hate radio 24/7 and televised Trump rallies and interviews; all free advertising. All these folks hear is Trump’s lies.
If you tell them the truth they just hear “la la la la la la la,” Trump is gunna build a wall and Mexico will pay for it and what about those emails which disqualify Clinton. What America needs is a businessman. If he loses the election will have been rigged. Trump lies repeated as fact.
All of this notwithstanding the press should not be stenographers nor bipartisan where the fate of the nation is concerned. There are still a number of voters who have not made up their minds. Earn your paychecks. Don’t be like the GOP in Congress. Do your job.
3
What's the media's job? Don't you guys know what it is already? Do you need to be reminded over and over? Report the content, and only editorialize when its the job of the journalist to actually editorialize. Pick apart the candidates statements, call out the lies, the obfuscations, or watered down truths. Present the facts to help with the aforementioned tasks. Keep it simple, keep it tight and on point.
Dont exceed the boundaries of your job descriptions. Unless you have real breaking news to report.
Dont exceed the boundaries of your job descriptions. Unless you have real breaking news to report.
1
Trump is bulling and conning the media. Including the NYT.
And another thing, why is the news media always trying to normalized Trump. He is not a normal candidate, he is a celebrity reality TV Host. The things he says should have disqualified him with the news media some months ago. The man is an ego-maniac. There I said it.
And another thing, why is the news media always trying to normalized Trump. He is not a normal candidate, he is a celebrity reality TV Host. The things he says should have disqualified him with the news media some months ago. The man is an ego-maniac. There I said it.
5
We have a negligent press and a Congress made up of a majority of members who think that protecting party dominance and power is more important than legislating. We have made the political process so toxic with loose rhetoric, why would anyone want to run for office, unless sheer power were the goal rather than improving the lives and well being of our country?
3
Most of the time, lying is something we have to have "proof" of, as though calling someone a liar is a profanity. If you know facts and someone else is misstating the facts or (in Trump's case) actually distorting the truth, it has to be recognized for what it is. We do not live our lives In a courtroom setting. The issue before us is to choose the best candidate for the most important job in our Country and arguably as a leader in the world. For us, the citizens--whether journalists or not--to condone lying allows an abhorrent outcome. Clinton is a known public figure who has been investigated. She has not committed fraud. The same is not true for Trump. He has been sued over 3,500 times. He has filed bankruptcy several times. He is currently involved in at least two major lawsuits--one involving allegations of rape and one over his fake university. Their is no equivalence between them. I agree with Mr. Kristoff. The press must report the actual known lies and stop the nonsensical false equivalence.
2
"few facts are clearer than that President Obama was born in the United States, yet only 62 percent of American voters say he was born here. "
-------------------
The reader might take hope from a further breakdown, telling us just what percentage of the 62 per cent actually believe that - the severely intellectually challenged - and what fraction are simply contrarian for one or more of the many reasons available to them.
I can't believe that nearly two out of three American voters can have been made that ignorant.
-------------------
The reader might take hope from a further breakdown, telling us just what percentage of the 62 per cent actually believe that - the severely intellectually challenged - and what fraction are simply contrarian for one or more of the many reasons available to them.
I can't believe that nearly two out of three American voters can have been made that ignorant.
4
We must call Trump what he truly is--a charlatan, a con man, a liar, a racist, a dangerously ill-informed demagogue, who has no respect for the U.S. Constitution.
Truth, I agree Mr. Kristof, is not stenography. But the truth is the press has gone well beyond stenography and has encouraged the Charlatan's fact-free pronouncements, bolstering his colossal ego, and signaling to the American public that Trump is a legitimate candidate for president.
Truth, I agree Mr. Kristof, is not stenography. But the truth is the press has gone well beyond stenography and has encouraged the Charlatan's fact-free pronouncements, bolstering his colossal ego, and signaling to the American public that Trump is a legitimate candidate for president.
3
To demystify the situation for Mr. Kristof:
There has never been a candidate so over-supported by the mainline press and so depreciated by the general public. Certainly, no candidate has ever raised so much money from so few people as Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately for those few elite (aka finance sector oligarchs, Hollywood pseudo-activist, etc.) who relish the opportunity to have a tool in the White House, we live in a democracy. Elections are decided by the masses, not the few.
There has never been a candidate so over-supported by the mainline press and so depreciated by the general public. Certainly, no candidate has ever raised so much money from so few people as Hillary Clinton. Unfortunately for those few elite (aka finance sector oligarchs, Hollywood pseudo-activist, etc.) who relish the opportunity to have a tool in the White House, we live in a democracy. Elections are decided by the masses, not the few.
1
Lamentably, we don't have journalists today who enjoy the widespread public respect of an Edward R. Murrow, David Brinkley, Walter Cronkite or Eric Sevareid. It's not that they don't make journalists like they used to, but rather that intelligent, thoughtful voices are lost among all the inane chattering on cable TV and the Internet. I know it sounds elitist, but I miss those days when limited media outlets weeded out the blowhards.
1
It may be too late to stop the travesty of electing Trump. For close to two years, he has rampaged accross America like a rogue animal, lying openly, talking doom to the many, many gullible. The press has been stenographers longer than these eight years, Mitt Romney had a list of practiced lies known as talking points, never challenged. But, of course, Mitt was sane and would have governed sensibly, favoring the rich, of course, but he would not have blown up the place with Putin glomming or race baiting.
For eight years, resentful whites have waited to punish the nation for electing a black man buttressed by eight years of conspiracy therories and lies while the press stenographers played along with bland false equivalency, legitimizing the Tea Party, right wing 24 hour propaganda media, etc. Now we are the precipice of putting a dangerous charlatan in charge and the likes of Maureen Dowd, cowardly G.O.P. "Leaders" like Ryan, McConnell, Priebus, Christie, Giuliani, Politico, take a bow, press stenographers too.
For eight years, resentful whites have waited to punish the nation for electing a black man buttressed by eight years of conspiracy therories and lies while the press stenographers played along with bland false equivalency, legitimizing the Tea Party, right wing 24 hour propaganda media, etc. Now we are the precipice of putting a dangerous charlatan in charge and the likes of Maureen Dowd, cowardly G.O.P. "Leaders" like Ryan, McConnell, Priebus, Christie, Giuliani, Politico, take a bow, press stenographers too.
3
Trump has already done lasting damage to the reputation of this country by his dissemination of prejudices and falsehoods.
His supporters find him entertaining and amusing. They regard his crudity as honest and refreshing.
They admire the fact that he has been able to go through life without following many of the common rules of decent conduct and lawful behavior. They like his ignorance of foreign and domestic affairs, his complete lack of experience in government, the insults he heaps on his opponents, the attitudes he expresses toward women and minorities and his refusal to release his taxes.
He is doing for them what no other Presidential candidate has done in a very long time. He is doing what they themselves would be doing if they had the guts and the money to do it. He is sticking-it to the man.
Mr. Trump has wisely avoided preparing for the debates. His unwashed supporters want the unwashed Trump, and he knows it. A normal candidate like Mrs. Clinton will need to demonstrate unusual amounts of poise, dignity and intelligence throughout the debates. Her looks and manner of dress will be heavily criticized. All Trump needs to do is show up. Even wearing a clown suit, his admirers will support and praise him.
I wish her the very best of luck.
His supporters find him entertaining and amusing. They regard his crudity as honest and refreshing.
They admire the fact that he has been able to go through life without following many of the common rules of decent conduct and lawful behavior. They like his ignorance of foreign and domestic affairs, his complete lack of experience in government, the insults he heaps on his opponents, the attitudes he expresses toward women and minorities and his refusal to release his taxes.
He is doing for them what no other Presidential candidate has done in a very long time. He is doing what they themselves would be doing if they had the guts and the money to do it. He is sticking-it to the man.
Mr. Trump has wisely avoided preparing for the debates. His unwashed supporters want the unwashed Trump, and he knows it. A normal candidate like Mrs. Clinton will need to demonstrate unusual amounts of poise, dignity and intelligence throughout the debates. Her looks and manner of dress will be heavily criticized. All Trump needs to do is show up. Even wearing a clown suit, his admirers will support and praise him.
I wish her the very best of luck.
2
Two issues with 'print media' covering elections in this 140 character world many of us live in. One, many people no longer read for more than the time it takes to watch commercial, 60 seconds. Two, in many instances, written news stories are accompanied by video clips which, when seen, more than likely will obscure or even negate what is being written.
Sadly this opinion piece illustrates why many have lost faith in the willingness (ability?) of journalists to be fair and essentially honest. In the 6th paragraph of his article Mr. Kristof strongly implies, if not outright asserts, that one must go back to 2008 to find a credible example of Mrs. Clinton lying. Has he not read his own paper in the last few months? This example of selective reporting of facts is precisely why so many no longer trust the media. So no, it would not be particularly well received to have the media assert the right to tell the rest of us who is telling the truth and who is not.
2
If one of the candidates says her great virtue is experience and all of her experiences are bad, shouldn't the media point that out. The reset with Russia was a debacle. Benghazi was a debacle covered up with a lie. I would love to see the NYT do its job and do an honest assessment of her tenure in public office. I think it would be quite revealing about the value of her experience.
1
Mr. Kristof, you are very, very late to the party.
1
There's a reason, Nick, why you, as a reporter, are given "protected status" in the First Amendment: It is because you are the only barrier between us, The People, and the con men or the enemies of our country.
Here's the First Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, OR OF THE PRESS; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (my emphasis).
Has the Press in the history of this country ever upheld its duty?
Largely, no, it had some great moments: Watergate and the Pentagon Papers, but was that an erratic blip, specific only to that time?
I don't care.
That was then - this is now.
For 18 months the Press had fun with the Klown Kar. The depth of reporting was an oil slick deep. There was a book-review of Jane Mayer's "Dark Money" on the Kochs. That was it. No investigations on Trump, Bush, Rubio, Huckabee, Christie..... none of them.
EMAILS! you, the Press howled, til, poof, it was all gone. Uh-oh.
And then Trump's neo-Nazi links exploded, full bore.
And, even that, not one of you will touch.
I think Trump's liasions were there all the time, all the thugs and bullies: Mafia, White Supremists, Russian banks, sweatshops, misogyny, a crook.
What's with his tax-returns, Nick?
Not even that.
This is utter incompetence.
This has nothing to do with "the debates".
Oil slick deep.
Here's the First Amendment:
"Congress shall make no law respecting an establishment of religion, or prohibiting the free exercise thereof; or abridging the freedom of speech, OR OF THE PRESS; or the right of the people to peacefully assemble, and to petition the Government for a redress of grievances." (my emphasis).
Has the Press in the history of this country ever upheld its duty?
Largely, no, it had some great moments: Watergate and the Pentagon Papers, but was that an erratic blip, specific only to that time?
I don't care.
That was then - this is now.
For 18 months the Press had fun with the Klown Kar. The depth of reporting was an oil slick deep. There was a book-review of Jane Mayer's "Dark Money" on the Kochs. That was it. No investigations on Trump, Bush, Rubio, Huckabee, Christie..... none of them.
EMAILS! you, the Press howled, til, poof, it was all gone. Uh-oh.
And then Trump's neo-Nazi links exploded, full bore.
And, even that, not one of you will touch.
I think Trump's liasions were there all the time, all the thugs and bullies: Mafia, White Supremists, Russian banks, sweatshops, misogyny, a crook.
What's with his tax-returns, Nick?
Not even that.
This is utter incompetence.
This has nothing to do with "the debates".
Oil slick deep.
4
"Frankly, we should be discomfited that many Americans have absorbed the idea that Hillary Clinton "
Seems to me, Nick, that We The people, have gone independent from you the... ,.... whatever
I'd be proud of the voters, making their own determinations
too bad your client loses
Seems to me, Nick, that We The people, have gone independent from you the... ,.... whatever
I'd be proud of the voters, making their own determinations
too bad your client loses
"How should we report on a duplicitous demagogue?" You must be referring to Mrs. Clinton.
Oh, Mr. Kristoff, an excellent article but I am very much afraid that it may be too little, far too late. The media has been enabling Mr. Trump and, for that matter, the right wing "dog whistles" of the Republican Party that led to the rise of this dangerous dangerous man for years, possibly decades. And, now we are faced with a borderline Neo Nazi candidate, a man who trades on and encourages and benefits from the darkest parts of American populism - racism, xenophobia, misogyny, cruelty. We are faced with the very real possibility that this man will be elected. I lived through (as a small child, but very aware of the effect it had in my family) Joe McCarthy's raging through our land and people buying into his lies and deceit. My entire extended family did not survive the Holocaust in a Europe that bought into the racism and cruelty of another "strong man demagogue." This feels very "deja vu" to me and I am frightened about the outcome of this election and fear for the future of our country.
1
Perhaps corrective journalism could avoid repeating the lie, especially repeating it first and following up with a long explanation that is tuned out.
For example, Trump harped on the same lie 13 times last night, a lie he introduced in the fall of 2015. The truth is ....
For example, Trump harped on the same lie 13 times last night, a lie he introduced in the fall of 2015. The truth is ....
2
In my opinion, the media (in total; not only news 'shows', all of TV, radio, newspapers, and even including all us 'contributors' on and in twitterville and facebookland) mishandled this before "that guy" came down that escalator. Before and after that moment the media gave this guy undue and unwarranted coverage without serious critic.
Ya have to stop this guy mid-sentence or before, because that is where his mis-statements start. And nobody did it and nobody does it.
How many times have I heard, "What he says is newsworthy because he is a presidential candidate." NO. Just because a person is a presidential candidate does not make every, often insignificant, thing said "newsworthy." And furthermore, ratings and profits and even this: 'giving the public what they want' is not a reason or and excuse for the coverage.
However, no problem. We will all figure this out the day before the election. Or the day after.
Ya have to stop this guy mid-sentence or before, because that is where his mis-statements start. And nobody did it and nobody does it.
How many times have I heard, "What he says is newsworthy because he is a presidential candidate." NO. Just because a person is a presidential candidate does not make every, often insignificant, thing said "newsworthy." And furthermore, ratings and profits and even this: 'giving the public what they want' is not a reason or and excuse for the coverage.
However, no problem. We will all figure this out the day before the election. Or the day after.
1
what words of wisdom, but they will mostly fall on deaf ears. Most "news" today is just entertainment, especially for those who don't read. a sad state of affairs. I fear for the future.
1
"In watching the campaign coverage this year, I’ve sometimes had the same distressing feeling I felt in the run-up to the war in Iraq — that we in the media were greasing the skids to a bad outcome for our country" Too little, too late, Kristoff ... if Trump wins you and your colleagues' OWN it.
2
Yes, the press is remiss, but not just in this election. Elections have been covered as a sport for a long time. History, economics, ecology, reality, policy, don't come into it. Maybe sports are covered more honestly: Teams and players are tested on the court and the field before champions are chosen. Politics is judged more as performance art: Who is acting "presidential"? We don't have real debates where the candidates must show a depth of knowledge of real issues.
Used to be, that "news" channels had to present fair and equal reporting on the candidates, and to give them equal time. Since that law was rescinded, One station, FOX "news" has become one long commercial for Trump and anything republican. No equal treatment, no equal air time for opposing views. They are the Jerry Springer show of yellow journalism. They alone can claim the victory for Trump by giving him free reign and no fact checking or opposition. And the millions of stupid people out there who listen to this as their only source of information will vote and send this country right down the toilet.
Fox should be censored by the FCC, if there is any integrity left in them, either.
Fox should be censored by the FCC, if there is any integrity left in them, either.
2
Falsehoods should be confronted candidate no longer get a free pass on this. The media should fact check and confront the candidate every time they say something that has been fact checked and verified as false and every time they bring it up again confront the candidate until they stop bringing it up. It is way time for the media to do its job of informing the public not being a mouth piece for who ever has the microphone.
1
Calling Donald Trump a charlatan is a disservice to readers. I would encourage readers to do their own fact checking and they find, as I have, that the truth is more nuanced than either Democrats and their supporters would have us believe. Trump's support or opposition to the Iraq war is a prime example. His alleged support for the war is often cited by referencing his Howard Stern interview in September, 2002. In fact he, when asked, if he supports the war by Stern replies " Yeah, I guess so", clearly ambivalent and factcheck.org cites July 2003 and November 2003 statements by Trump as indicating his disenchantment or opposition to the war.. It's hard to call the NYT unbiased and factual when in the last 14 elections they endorsed the Democrat. In 7 of those 14 elections the American people endorsed the Republican.
4
Focus on Trump distracts from the uber-charlatan, the POTUS who told us "Government is the problem;" who gave us Iran-Contra and a clutch of convictions--all overturned by GHWB.
The end justifies the means? Regarding the truth, Clinton believes she should tell the truth but she has failed at times (as have most of us). Trump takes pride in inventing things that will help him achieve his goal and really has no regard for the truth. Obviously, many (not all) of his supporters feel this is OK, as long as they get the change for which they are longing. Having no regard for the truth may actually give Trump a big advantage in the debates. Scary.
1
Well, Tom Gibson, let us put up a fight and support Clinton. Our ancestors, some dating back to the American Revolution, did not throw in the towel to give into this kind of poverty of spirit, engendered by this less-than-savoury businessman, but fought for the freedom of their Countrymen and the end of Slavery.
They fought for the education of women and their right to vote, some perished. Calling on all my ancestors from Ireland, England and France for my Country of birth, America is in trouble. Democracy is in danger, and a self-proclaimed ruler is walking about us with 'American Pride'. This is not the Country, or the Liberties you fought hard to achieve, something has gone wrong, and there is a courageous woman sitting on a War Horse about to challenge this Rooster and inciter, taking us backwards into darkness.
They fought for the education of women and their right to vote, some perished. Calling on all my ancestors from Ireland, England and France for my Country of birth, America is in trouble. Democracy is in danger, and a self-proclaimed ruler is walking about us with 'American Pride'. This is not the Country, or the Liberties you fought hard to achieve, something has gone wrong, and there is a courageous woman sitting on a War Horse about to challenge this Rooster and inciter, taking us backwards into darkness.
1
What has taken you so long to finally call out Trump for his lies and misogyny?
Sen. Joseph McCarthy ruined many lives before someone finally called him out; Trump could ruin the entire country if he becomes President.
Sen. Joseph McCarthy ruined many lives before someone finally called him out; Trump could ruin the entire country if he becomes President.
4
Finally!!! But is it too little, too late? As Charlie Sykes (no centrist himself) noted, the right wing has spent the last 20 years delegitimizing the responsible media to the point that right-wingers won't believe anything they/you print, even true hard facts. How do you regain stature between now and November 8th - or ever?
4
When the dust settles and the media is reviewing Trump's first 100 Days in the Presidency, at least Mr. Kristof can have some comfort by remembering that he did sound out a warning and he didn't always revert to some obfuscating way to say what he really felt. That is indeed far better than the comfort that the Editors of the New York Times will have.
Someone once said--Perhaps it was Camus--that in a war between cops and robbers, objectivity favors the robbers. If it were Camus speaking, then he was writing in an occupied France and was speaking metaphorically about a war between fascism and the Republic. At the present moment, America is not occupied by an undemocratic force; the Times could have spoken out more forcefully when it would have been useful to do so.
A meek editorial in support of the more rational choice of two is worthless.
Someone once said--Perhaps it was Camus--that in a war between cops and robbers, objectivity favors the robbers. If it were Camus speaking, then he was writing in an occupied France and was speaking metaphorically about a war between fascism and the Republic. At the present moment, America is not occupied by an undemocratic force; the Times could have spoken out more forcefully when it would have been useful to do so.
A meek editorial in support of the more rational choice of two is worthless.
1
You say that fact checking "on the fly" is difficult. This says to me that TV as a medium is less trustworthy than print, the latter at least permitting more reflection and thought.
Perhaps a way to bring more reflection into play would be to interrupt the debates a couple of times with perhaps 5-10 minutes of response by respected newspaper journalists, then let the candidates respond in turn.
Perhaps a way to bring more reflection into play would be to interrupt the debates a couple of times with perhaps 5-10 minutes of response by respected newspaper journalists, then let the candidates respond in turn.
1
With all due respect, this article is a little late. I've become more distrusting of the press because so many of you and your fellow journalists have utterly failed to do your job this election year. It's shocking. It's sad. And I fear it will have calamitous effects in the election itself.
3
So shouldn't the press cover Hillary in much the same way? Trump never falsely claimed to have landed in a war zone, under sniper fire!
Other than a handful of people at the Times and Wash Post, there are no "journalists" left. The cable and network owners have no interest in hiring journalists. It is sad. I encourage everyone to watch episodes of 'Newsroom" from HBO. Pretty soon, even those of us old enough to remember "journalism" won't be around any more. Then everyone will be allowed to pick their own facts.
3
Determining who is the charlatan and who is the politician between these bombastic political entertainers is impossible without reference to the followers of Donald and Hillary. Hillary has been married to a moral degenerate serial adulterer cowardly draft dodging misogynist privileged plutocrat white supremacist male who is just like her opponent less two wives and plus 4 kids. An honest politician is an oxymoron.
1
You, the media, my sound the alarm bells, every day, in every state, in every media outlet, whether left right, or fiction, that Trump is a fraud!!!! The RNC has created the -truth- equivalency between these two candidates and actually are selling this election as an actual 'horse race' when it should (and hopefully) is the farthest thing from the truth!!! He is an imposter, a fraud, and 'lier'. She is a former SOS, Senator, First Lady........ and and and! Does she have more experience to deal with this country's ills in her heft hand that he has at all? Yes! No other questions, please!!!! WHy is this not obvious to the rest of the electorate?
2
media's job re: Trump: say nothing
1
Accusing that the debates are rigged, as he has already claimed the election is, shows precisely how much of a coward Trump is. His utter fear of his own shortcomings puts him smack in the middle of the chicken-hearted lily-livered crowd. But... he does have incredible shortcomings that makes him completely unfit to be President!
2
Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling.....so very true but up until now, journalists have simply printed the words the candidates say without diving into whether they'e true or not. You all have failed in the the most basic goals of journalism which is to uncover the truth. There are many scandals that have been exposed - Love Canal, Watergate, Wells Fargo, WMD - that have been not been subjected to the even handed treatment. Why throw ethics out the window when it comes to candidates? It would seem the stakes were much higher with candidates and this is the one place to be clear and truthful. The media have played right into the idea that one side can have their own facts and reality.
1
This is where I disagree with Mr. Kristof. It has never been journalists role to just report the news. That only came about with television anchors . Investigative journalism has been around for a long time and is what in the age of endless chatter what I expect from journalists. If you do not question the truth of what is being said or done you are not doing your job.
4
"How should we report on a duplicitous demagogue?"
When he goes to Mexico to speak to the president of that country and later crosses back across the border to speak to his base, have actual reporters at each event, giving equal space to each event.
That would've been a good start.
When he goes to Mexico to speak to the president of that country and later crosses back across the border to speak to his base, have actual reporters at each event, giving equal space to each event.
That would've been a good start.
3
Case in point: the media's complicity in propagating Trump claims of a Clinton health issue. He’s a seventy year old borderline obese male, addicted to fast food, who gets no regular exercise. The real Donald Trump is lazy and sedentary, reportedly spending his days watching himself on TV rather than working on his campaign. He only breaks this routine to fly on his private plane to an event, gesture for an hour, and fly back to sleep in his own bed. Unlike Clinton, he doesn’t allow the press to travel with him, lest they see his lethargy.
In contrast, even detractors who have worked with Clinton describe her boundless energy, stamina, and work ethic. But he projected his own sluggishness onto her for a year, skillfully playing the press into obsessing over any sign that her brutal pace was taking a toll.
His projection strategy has worked over and over, when he tars his opponents as lying, corrupt, and non-transparent even as he exhibits these qualities in spades. And the media is happy to play along.
In contrast, even detractors who have worked with Clinton describe her boundless energy, stamina, and work ethic. But he projected his own sluggishness onto her for a year, skillfully playing the press into obsessing over any sign that her brutal pace was taking a toll.
His projection strategy has worked over and over, when he tars his opponents as lying, corrupt, and non-transparent even as he exhibits these qualities in spades. And the media is happy to play along.
6
Thank you Mr. Kristoff. As governments and people around the world look to US elections to set standards, so too do they look to the US media. So far the press coverage of this election has been abysmal. It is as if the press -- television in particular -- has absolved itself of its responsibility to report accurately in order to be part of the reality show extravaganza. A lot of people fear it is too late. It is not too late until November 9. Media, do your jobs. Please.
3
Donald Trump is a charlatan? Will all due respects stories like this are why less than 33% of American trust the media. Why is it so difficult for the NYT to write report factual stories instead of the mindless political advocacy? Here is the "inconvenient truth" you seem to ignore.
Only one candidate has repeatedly lied, under oath, to Congress.
Only one candidate has accepted donations from foreign governments in exchange for access and favors as Secretary of State.
Only one candidate managed the overthrow of the legitimate government in Libya and did nothing as our embassy staff pleaded for protection and help.
And so on...
Admittedly, Donald Trump is no acolyte. However, compared to Hillary, he would be a candidate for Sainthood.
Only one candidate has repeatedly lied, under oath, to Congress.
Only one candidate has accepted donations from foreign governments in exchange for access and favors as Secretary of State.
Only one candidate managed the overthrow of the legitimate government in Libya and did nothing as our embassy staff pleaded for protection and help.
And so on...
Admittedly, Donald Trump is no acolyte. However, compared to Hillary, he would be a candidate for Sainthood.
1
Your "With all due respect..." was sufficient to know that what would follow would be claptrap, Lauren.
Try one of these more accurate truths: "Only one candidate is a nincompoop of the highest order." "Only one candidate has gone bankrupt over and over because he's a nebbish." "Only one candidate doesn't have the faintest idea of where any country is located on our earth." "Only one candidate would not give a rat's poot what you think; mainly, because you're a woman."
Well, I can forgive him for that last one, because I feel the same.
Try one of these more accurate truths: "Only one candidate is a nincompoop of the highest order." "Only one candidate has gone bankrupt over and over because he's a nebbish." "Only one candidate doesn't have the faintest idea of where any country is located on our earth." "Only one candidate would not give a rat's poot what you think; mainly, because you're a woman."
Well, I can forgive him for that last one, because I feel the same.
3
While the fact-checking and truth-telling must continue in earnest--I'm on your side, Nick, forever--there is an unsettling truth that has emerged: the vast number of voters who are willfully ignoring the time-honored tradition of rational argument in favor of an outsider (even a sociopathic narcissist can be an outsider).
Facts have thus been de-weaponized. That's how desperate people have become for something--anything--different from the compromised narratives of today's complicated world that simply don't follow a straight line. Trump trumps truth.
Fear drives that desperation, and fear is what gets the attention of consumers of news. Yes, there are the modern-day Hearsts like Murdoch and Ailes, and they are as damaging as they've always been.
But algorythmically-driven web page viewing automatically drives the narrative of paranoia, histrionics, anger to ensure that we get ads pushed to us for products we like to buy. And the more "traffic-accidents-we-can't-turn-away from" pages we view--the more we are shown.
It is as true for the Kristoff-reading, NPR, PBS fans organic food eaters and Prius drivers like me, as it is for the NASCAR-loving, FOX -watching, Ford F-150 drivers.
The more we struggle for one side or another--the more we strangle ourselves--let's just hope there are more of us than them. If for nothing else than the Supreme Court.
Facts have thus been de-weaponized. That's how desperate people have become for something--anything--different from the compromised narratives of today's complicated world that simply don't follow a straight line. Trump trumps truth.
Fear drives that desperation, and fear is what gets the attention of consumers of news. Yes, there are the modern-day Hearsts like Murdoch and Ailes, and they are as damaging as they've always been.
But algorythmically-driven web page viewing automatically drives the narrative of paranoia, histrionics, anger to ensure that we get ads pushed to us for products we like to buy. And the more "traffic-accidents-we-can't-turn-away from" pages we view--the more we are shown.
It is as true for the Kristoff-reading, NPR, PBS fans organic food eaters and Prius drivers like me, as it is for the NASCAR-loving, FOX -watching, Ford F-150 drivers.
The more we struggle for one side or another--the more we strangle ourselves--let's just hope there are more of us than them. If for nothing else than the Supreme Court.
2
Yes, by pretending the existence of false equivalency between Clinton and Trump, the media and journalists have failed the American voter. What was needed was not fair and balanced but rather fair and accurate reporting. And now, with the debates starting on Monday, the problem is obvious.
The problem for Hillary won't be Trump in the debates to come. She will call him out on his pathological lying and functionally useless "policy" assertions. No, the problem for her is how many voters make the incredibly stupid statement that they can't stand him but can't vote for her.
Not voting is voting for Trump. Voting for one of the two deranged third-party candidates from the equally deranged third parties is voting for Trump.
Voting for Hillary is voting AGAINST Trump, and that is reason enough, although, it should be obvious that in terms of being president she has it all: vast experience, intelligence, rational/moderate policy proposals, wisdom.
You don't have to like her to vote for her. You're voting to keep Trump from being president and getting an excellent president in the process.
You can do it. You need to do it.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
The problem for Hillary won't be Trump in the debates to come. She will call him out on his pathological lying and functionally useless "policy" assertions. No, the problem for her is how many voters make the incredibly stupid statement that they can't stand him but can't vote for her.
Not voting is voting for Trump. Voting for one of the two deranged third-party candidates from the equally deranged third parties is voting for Trump.
Voting for Hillary is voting AGAINST Trump, and that is reason enough, although, it should be obvious that in terms of being president she has it all: vast experience, intelligence, rational/moderate policy proposals, wisdom.
You don't have to like her to vote for her. You're voting to keep Trump from being president and getting an excellent president in the process.
You can do it. You need to do it.
Eclectic Pragmatist — http://eclectic-pragmatist.tumblr.com/
Eclectic Pragmatist — https://medium.com/eclectic-pragmatism
1
When psychopaths run for office, they lie. When they have power, they close a bridge. When they have ultimate power, they kill.
How do they gain power? Because weak journalists, who think they’re living dangerously by using the word “lie,” would never risk being criticized for describing Trump as a textbook “psychopath.” Every polite discussion, every debate which acts as if Trump’s positions are relevant plays into the psychopath’s hands.
So, about now you’re feeling aggrieved; didn’t you expose Trump’s lying. Sorry too little, too late, none of the usual rules apply. Trump voters know that they all lie; what makes Trump truly different is that he’s a psychopath - and what that predicts if he gains ultimate power.
When Trump does attains power, you’ll understand the deadly difference between a liar and a psychopath all too well.
“As I said in 2016, the primaries were rigged against me and the general election was rigged. Now I, President Donald J. Trump, see that the 2020 elections are also rigged and I have directed the FBI and our armed forces to enforce the indefinite delay of these phony elections.”
How do they gain power? Because weak journalists, who think they’re living dangerously by using the word “lie,” would never risk being criticized for describing Trump as a textbook “psychopath.” Every polite discussion, every debate which acts as if Trump’s positions are relevant plays into the psychopath’s hands.
So, about now you’re feeling aggrieved; didn’t you expose Trump’s lying. Sorry too little, too late, none of the usual rules apply. Trump voters know that they all lie; what makes Trump truly different is that he’s a psychopath - and what that predicts if he gains ultimate power.
When Trump does attains power, you’ll understand the deadly difference between a liar and a psychopath all too well.
“As I said in 2016, the primaries were rigged against me and the general election was rigged. Now I, President Donald J. Trump, see that the 2020 elections are also rigged and I have directed the FBI and our armed forces to enforce the indefinite delay of these phony elections.”
2
It is not the role of newspaper reporters to tell the people what they should think. Editorials serve this purpose. But for the news to become a series of editorials is simply wrong. High paid columnists give their professional opinions in a section of the newspaper set aside for this purpose. Your generic reporter is qualified only to tell you what happened. Most have a college education and are reasonably young. To let them hijack the news section to share their "great wisdom" is to give them a voice that they are unqualified to express. The editorials are separated from the news for good reason. When the news becomes a second editorial section, the newspaper becomes a diatribe which abandons the task of truth-telling. If the whole paper were dedicated to editorials all we would know is what the Times thinks should happen, without reference to what did happen. To give opinions without reporting the facts leaves the reader without the tools to make his own decisions. When a newspaper adopts the role of telling the people what they should think, it becomes an insidious instrument of propaganda.
1
Yes, they should report the news but if the news is Donald Trump lied about opposing the Iraq war they should report that. That's not opinion, that's fact.
3
Like all politicians, Clinton embellishes the truth and occasionally tells whoppers.
And the anti-Clinton people say they cannot vote for a liar.
But unlike all politicians, Trump lies constantly, always making himself the hero even when he was nowhere to be found--like saying he "predicted" the Charlotte riots.
But he's also said during the campaign that he wants do away with many of the rights we take for granted in the Constitution like:
Habeas Corpus (already in danger), the right established in the main body of the Constitution;
1st Amendment: Trump wants to restrict freedoms of the Press, religion and "expression" (the extrapolation of speech by the SCOTUS);
4th: warrantless search & seizure. He's called for Stop&Frisk, deemed unConstitutional;
5th: Due process--called for Rahami (the NJ bomber) to be stripped of his rights;
6th: Speedy trial, confront all evidence, right of defense counsel--see above;
8th: Has openly called for torture;
9th: Denies rights are "unalienable";
13th: some of his followers want slavery back--almost 1/5th;
14th: Tried to deny Pres Obama is a natural-born citizen (which, being born to an American mother, he is, even if he HAD been born in Kenya, like Ted Cruz, born in Canada), plus the validity of the Public Debt;
Other: He'll start a war over Iranian gestures and build a wall.
So...is Trump lying or telling the truth? If he's lying, why isn't he worse than Clinton? If he's telling the truth...he'll be another Saddam Hussein, or worse.
And the anti-Clinton people say they cannot vote for a liar.
But unlike all politicians, Trump lies constantly, always making himself the hero even when he was nowhere to be found--like saying he "predicted" the Charlotte riots.
But he's also said during the campaign that he wants do away with many of the rights we take for granted in the Constitution like:
Habeas Corpus (already in danger), the right established in the main body of the Constitution;
1st Amendment: Trump wants to restrict freedoms of the Press, religion and "expression" (the extrapolation of speech by the SCOTUS);
4th: warrantless search & seizure. He's called for Stop&Frisk, deemed unConstitutional;
5th: Due process--called for Rahami (the NJ bomber) to be stripped of his rights;
6th: Speedy trial, confront all evidence, right of defense counsel--see above;
8th: Has openly called for torture;
9th: Denies rights are "unalienable";
13th: some of his followers want slavery back--almost 1/5th;
14th: Tried to deny Pres Obama is a natural-born citizen (which, being born to an American mother, he is, even if he HAD been born in Kenya, like Ted Cruz, born in Canada), plus the validity of the Public Debt;
Other: He'll start a war over Iranian gestures and build a wall.
So...is Trump lying or telling the truth? If he's lying, why isn't he worse than Clinton? If he's telling the truth...he'll be another Saddam Hussein, or worse.
1
Well, there's a front-page story in the Washington Post today that is following your thinking on this, Nicholas, in which the reporters flatly say where Trump's statements are false. They don't say "lies," but they make the point well enough. Things appear to be changing, for the better, in journalism in this regard.
And it needs to. Trump reveals a fatal weakness in journalistic conventions that haven't adapted to this new threat -- the politician who can say anything, and will be supported by his own tribe's media megaphone, and by that I do mean Fox et al.
And it needs to. Trump reveals a fatal weakness in journalistic conventions that haven't adapted to this new threat -- the politician who can say anything, and will be supported by his own tribe's media megaphone, and by that I do mean Fox et al.
In his next column, Mr, Kristoff may wish to write about "How to Cover a Charlatan like Hillary Clinton".
The NY Times, and Mr, Kristoff in particular, do not seem to understand that their credibility is being undermined in a major way.
People understand that the choice between the two candidates is a hold-your-nose situation. The NY Times frames it in black and white. Not so.
The NY Times, and Mr, Kristoff in particular, do not seem to understand that their credibility is being undermined in a major way.
People understand that the choice between the two candidates is a hold-your-nose situation. The NY Times frames it in black and white. Not so.
1
It's a two way street when it comes to press bias and under reporting some stories and over reporting others. The country is sadly divided and confused. The elite selective morality (ignoring working class) is as damaging as the right wing press over reporting on emails. You are all a part of the same hypocrisy.
Two things contribute to the Trump phenomenon and explain why truth or falsehood is not as sharp a tool as it would normally be. People are angry. Some because our government is paralyzed, others because unable or unwilling to adapt to the realities of a globalized world, they see their way of life eroding. A goodly number of the former will vote straight ticket because they know divided government is indeed the cause of the paralysis. Yet some want someone, anyone who will reshuffle the deck and think Trump will do this. The latter group support the man who they believe will use his celebrity and tough talk to bring back those jobs. And here lies the rub: enamored with Trump's celebrity, they believe that celebrity is leverage enough to bring about the change they want. Yet that is not how politics works and ultimately they will be sadly disappointed. Change comes about incrementally, built brick by brick by someone like Hillary Clinton. As the Republicans said about Barack Obama in the 2008 election: "he is a celebrity, nothing more" and hope was dashed against the rocks of the political reality of governing in a divided age.
2
I hope its not to late for the media to finally get the backbone to call a lie, a lie, when they know it is. The trick is to do so without appearing to be biased. I'd like to believe that talented journalists can pull it off, but even doing it imperfectly is more responsible than ducking the issue, thus misleading the public by sins of omission.
1
My hope for the debates is that the print and broadcast reporters will feature actual comments on policy, ideas, and governing philosophy. And I hope those comments will be shown side by side to emphasize the dramatic differences in both quality and quantity of response. The temptation will be to flood the print and broadcast media with any "zingers" that have everything to do with showmanship and absolutely nothing to do with governing. Reagan's zinger about age brought so many laughs, but it did not answer the basic question about governing. If voters who have not paid much attention to the campaigns now tune in to watch the candidates, I believe reporters owe it to them and to all of us to focus on the differences in governing perspectives.
"...we in the media (particularly some in cable television) have enabled a charlatan by handing him the microphone and not adequately fact-checking what he says."
-Are you kidding me? EVERYONE is fact-checking this guy, CONSTANTLY. It seems to me that more attention is given to ANYTHING that Donald Trump says than anyone in history. Up until now, Trump seems to be using the "no press is bad press" philosophy. At one point, ignoring him might've made him go away. But apparently he was irressistible, and now that ship has sailed. The reason that Trump is as popular as he is the media's fault for giving him so much attention. At first, I think the demrocrats must've thought that he would be the dream opponent. Now, the media has created a monster. You can't start a forest fire and then blame the forest or the fire.
-Are you kidding me? EVERYONE is fact-checking this guy, CONSTANTLY. It seems to me that more attention is given to ANYTHING that Donald Trump says than anyone in history. Up until now, Trump seems to be using the "no press is bad press" philosophy. At one point, ignoring him might've made him go away. But apparently he was irressistible, and now that ship has sailed. The reason that Trump is as popular as he is the media's fault for giving him so much attention. At first, I think the demrocrats must've thought that he would be the dream opponent. Now, the media has created a monster. You can't start a forest fire and then blame the forest or the fire.
3
You almost get it right. There is a presumption in the Constitution and in public life of mental healthiness. When that is absent, the discussion should not pass beyond that point. End of discussion.
"Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling" should be the byword for journalism studies and professional journalists. Aside from media platforms controlled by biased corporate interests and wealthy people, the principal problem is today's glut of celebrity commentators but paucity of professional print and broadcast journalists.
The fourth estate is in serious disrepair and our nation is the worse for it. Recall when peoples' natural distrust of politicians was balanced by the seemingly universal trust enjoyed by "Uncle Walt" Cronkite. Recall when Tim Russert's Meet the Press was appointment television. These two stalwarts of journalism, joined by a few others, were the clear level-headed and objective voices of reason and truth we sorely lack today.
Though it now seems naive, our habit, apparently and sadly now lost, was to filter political rhetoric through trusted journalists who, rather than attempting to sway us, encouraged us to arrive at our own conclusions. Have we really changed so much as a nation that trusted objective journalism that respects its audience is no longer possible?
The fourth estate is in serious disrepair and our nation is the worse for it. Recall when peoples' natural distrust of politicians was balanced by the seemingly universal trust enjoyed by "Uncle Walt" Cronkite. Recall when Tim Russert's Meet the Press was appointment television. These two stalwarts of journalism, joined by a few others, were the clear level-headed and objective voices of reason and truth we sorely lack today.
Though it now seems naive, our habit, apparently and sadly now lost, was to filter political rhetoric through trusted journalists who, rather than attempting to sway us, encouraged us to arrive at our own conclusions. Have we really changed so much as a nation that trusted objective journalism that respects its audience is no longer possible?
1
Trump is going to shake things up in Washington and get comprise from the conservatives and liberals. Hog wash! Washington is broken because there are those who will not compromise, namely the tea party and those they have coward. Trump is a mistake because there are so many Americans that are painfully ignorant of why we have the problems we have and want to blame everyone but themselves for not learning and understanding the source of the problems. So they blame, blame, blame is what we do when we refuse to take responsibility.
Vote motivated by knowledge not ignorance, fear and hatred.
Vote motivated by knowledge not ignorance, fear and hatred.
1
Good analyisis by Kristoff. One point I would add is to clarify his citation that only 6% trust the press... First, you will NEVER get the hard right and extremists to trust the media, at least not THEIR media. That should not be the goal of any serious news organization. Second, you only get as low as 6% by losing many of the rest of what I would call responsible and intelligent citizens when you cover someone like Trump like you are, with free unfiltered 24/7 publicity, kid glove interviews, and repeated false equivalence where the gaps are as far apart as the Grand Canyon's walls. IOW, the media is losing the trust of people like me and I am sure some other readers here.
1
Nicholas, why didn't you mention Matt Lauer by name?
1
"We must do our jobs" when it comes to covering Trump.
You mean like the bang up job you've done so far for Hillary?
You mean like the bang up job you've done so far for Hillary?
1
The option of not covering charlatans should be strongly considered. As charlatans are emboldened by attention, regardless of the emptiness of their message, the media ends up misdirecting and wasting readers' time by continuing to cover what becomes essentially entertainment, not the serious policy dialogue that should match the importance of a presidential election.
1
There is a predominant myth that there are 'two sides' to any issue, that news coverage must fairly balance between them. That simply isn't true--there are always many historical and threads that weave a complex fabric of story. Even in an election between two candidates from two parties, the stories are not two-sided. The Republican Party seems to have imploded in this case, and produced a reality show buffoon as a candidate. The Democrats are rising in power after a long down period, thanks to Obama and Clinton, to racial dynamics, a burst of fundraising in the wake of the Citizens United decision, etc. The Democratic candidate is a woman who faces quiet misogyny at every corner, as well as a long Republican campaign to discredit her. There aren't two sides, there are 50,000. Cover the [fascinating, historic] story, not the '2 sides' and you will find the sweet spot that honors the truth.
3
You want people to vote for Hillary Clinton because Trump lied? Listen to yourself. For the sake of argument, let's just count all of Trumps, hyperbole, exagerations and inaccuracies as lies. Did he do it under oath? Did he he unlawfully convey funds through a slush fund and then withdraw $50 million in "expenses?" Did he destroy evidence in ongoing investigations? Did he and his wife try bear the full power of the us government and a team of blue ribbon spin doctors to discredit and destroy a 22 year old intern who they knew
To be telling the truth? You see, Mr. Kristoff, your outrage is not based on the untruthfulness of one politician over another. It is that you are intolerant of his ideology, whereas you will tolerate any misdeeds from the left. Hillary Clinton is a bloodless, calculating and thoroughly dishonest candidate. No matter what you and her other water carriers say about her opponent will not convince people to the contrary.
To be telling the truth? You see, Mr. Kristoff, your outrage is not based on the untruthfulness of one politician over another. It is that you are intolerant of his ideology, whereas you will tolerate any misdeeds from the left. Hillary Clinton is a bloodless, calculating and thoroughly dishonest candidate. No matter what you and her other water carriers say about her opponent will not convince people to the contrary.
3
These are troubling times. We have suffered through a 15 year war and weak economy that has largely affected the lower classes, a Congress which has done nothing but reflect extreme views. A feckless, clueless media has then promoted the growth of a demagogue adept at tapping into the fears, anger and frustration of the lower/middle classes. His message, based in conspiracy theory, extreme nationalism, and long standing bigotry against religious and ethnic groups is should frighten even the media. He does not openly promote but suggest that violence is a viable political solution. Am I talking about the 1930's? No, today! At the same time, the media promotes openly, falsehoods about his opponent, and thereby lies to the public. Shame!
6
Good Americans will lead us to disaster as they erect Trump.
But yeah you all are most complicit with the false equivalence and narratives you keep bleating.
But yeah you all are most complicit with the false equivalence and narratives you keep bleating.
2
And to think that TV "journalists" are highly paid for reading the news and looking good! I understand Matt Lauer's yearly pay is about $22 million! Go figure!
5
Mr. Kristoff, we don;t have any Murrows in the media today. It's a shame to talk about investigative journalism when your paper puts on the front page (above the fold) "Trumop backs away from birther THEORY." It was a birther LIE and the NYT gave it credence bu calling it a theory as if there were a shred of evidence to support a racist lie. Finally, it is all about money and nothing about truth. The GOP nominee, a train wreck and heart attack in waiting, draw crowds; the "news" media loves the dollars flowing in from covering his endless lies. If he spoke the truth their ad dollars would drop. We should not have to beg the moderators to so some fact checking. Candy, please come out of retirement and help save us!
5
Mr. Kristof, (disclosure: fully against Trump, reluctant Hilary supporter) most liberal journalists are aghast that anyone would vote for Trump and revert to assuming that if you just yell the same accusations louder that he is a racists, a liar, no experience, etc that it will sway the public. Further, the Hilary Clinton is given a pass because there is fear that if she is held accountable, it may propel Trump into office.
Trump supporters dont see him as a misogynistic racists bully. They see the world as having bent so far backwards toward political correctness that his course language is a reaction and that he will bring back balance (most that I know do not see to bring back the 50's with subservient non whites and women). They see his lack of policy and precise political speech as reasonable as he never chose the very tainted 'profession' of a politician. The assumption is that he was capable in another profession and can apply those attributes that made him successful to this new job.
I believe that it is a fools errand to attempt to highlight his flaws. He may have a huge gaff or but it is actually up to Hilary. She is seen as untrustworthy (and not just because of the 'vast right wing conspiracy'). She is seen as not only continuing the Obama administration but the last two years have brought racial and social pitchfork populism to a new level and her policies are seen as only helping minorities and leaving the rest of the country behind.
Trump supporters dont see him as a misogynistic racists bully. They see the world as having bent so far backwards toward political correctness that his course language is a reaction and that he will bring back balance (most that I know do not see to bring back the 50's with subservient non whites and women). They see his lack of policy and precise political speech as reasonable as he never chose the very tainted 'profession' of a politician. The assumption is that he was capable in another profession and can apply those attributes that made him successful to this new job.
I believe that it is a fools errand to attempt to highlight his flaws. He may have a huge gaff or but it is actually up to Hilary. She is seen as untrustworthy (and not just because of the 'vast right wing conspiracy'). She is seen as not only continuing the Obama administration but the last two years have brought racial and social pitchfork populism to a new level and her policies are seen as only helping minorities and leaving the rest of the country behind.
3
How to cover a charlatan like Trump? On time, before he's the nominee! Too many remained silent as this country came to where we must question the durability of our democracy. In The Shield of Achilles, Philip Bobbitt, described the progression of politics from city states to nation states, and on to what he calls market states. Hobsbawm warned that nation states lost control of their economies beginning in the 1970s. Few noticed that beginning, being distracted by the side-shows of the Nixon era. (Vietnam; dollar freed from gold; Opec and oil crisis; Watergate; Sandinista Revolution; Iranian Islamic Revolution; USSR invaded Afghanistan.) Trump learned his trade in that time. His slogan might be summed up in the title of a contemporaneous Brit comedy: Never Mind the Quality, Feel the Width. (Two tailors, one Jewish, one Catholic, try and fail to understand each other.)
Many laughed at Trump. He understands our need to laugh and our need to hate.
Many laughed at Trump. He understands our need to laugh and our need to hate.
2
Journalists with a conscience will have to examine their substantial role in the rise of Trump, but alas, It's way too late for them to report in a way that will change minds about Trump's lies. At this point, most Americans have tuned out to new information about his past, and even those who don't love everything about this man (his playboy lifestyle, his casinos, his entertainment persona) have made up their minds that Trump is more honest than Clinton. That's a done deal.
Dear reliable Mr. Tocqueville, please remind Mr. Kristoff that once public opinion becomes the majority opinion, it is extraordinarily difficult to push back against it and change, and if it does change, it takes time.
We are now out of time.
Dear reliable Mr. Tocqueville, please remind Mr. Kristoff that once public opinion becomes the majority opinion, it is extraordinarily difficult to push back against it and change, and if it does change, it takes time.
We are now out of time.
3
Trump can shout a lie down Fifth Avenue in New York and will not lose a vote.
4
Wow, Kristof says it is a known fact that Trump won't build a wall that Mexico will pay for. I guess he's proposing that he and the rest of the media have an obligation to be clairvoyant when it comes to Trump!
1
Sadly, by telling the truth those exposing Drumpfts "misstatements" will be called shills for the other camp. Granted that is true, the exposure is needed anyway. Just make sure you also expose anything not true by Clinton and try to avoid another Candy Crowlet foot in mouth moment.
Lots of the media, including Chris Matthews from MSNBC give full access to the Trump messengers simply because they think the Trump campaign, and probably a Trump presidency, is more exciting for them personally, and will bring more outrageous things to the news, and folks will watch the program.
They don't care anywhere near as much about our democracy and the furtherance of the human condition as they pretend. Trump has bought them, albeit with a different currency, and they stay bought by him.
They don't care anywhere near as much about our democracy and the furtherance of the human condition as they pretend. Trump has bought them, albeit with a different currency, and they stay bought by him.
4
Instead of spending the hour after the debate letting pundits say what they think about what was said, why not spend it fact checking and calling out the lies and false numbers.
4
Thank you for this article. I hope it is read and considered by all reporters. It is frustrating when one wants to listen to interviews and reports to get to the facts when statements made aren't followed up by credible journalistic questioning. We're not all gullible. We want facts on which to base our decisions. We respect good journalists.
2
Shirley, you jest.
The reason only 6% have confidence in the press is bc the press has not been doing their job since Mr. Obama has been elected, believing that if they are "fair," the lies the GOP has published ad nauseum through Fox News and hundreds of conservative media outlets will magically disappear.
6
churchill said something like ". . . the best argument against democracy is spending five minutes with the average voter." it's my view that many trump supporters not only don't know the truth about him, or don't care. as he famously said "i could stand on fifth ave. and shoot somebody and my supporters would continue to support me." that he lies and is completely unacceptable on every level appears not to be a concern. watching interviews with some of his supporters who say, with pride, that they don't read anything in the MSM, and don't need any facts, is appalling. they simply like him (and perhaps even find his bigotry and ignorance appealing) and have drunk the kool-aid big time. who is to inform these folks, when truth seems not to matter to them? if their only information comes from fox news, as it appears to do, we are in big trouble.
4
Odd thing is, once the Soviet archives were opened up, McCarthy turned out to be right.
It is your opinion (and mine and that of most everyone else) that if he were elected, Trump would never build his wall and Mexico most certainly not pay for it. But that is not a fact. It is intelligent, highly probably speculation.
It is a fact that President Obama was born in the United States. Trump's bankruptcies, the lawsuits over Trump University and his early support for the Iraq war are facts.
The press should absolutely hold Trump accountable for his lies. But if the press is going to point out the lies, it must be clear about the difference between facts and speculation.
It is a fact that President Obama was born in the United States. Trump's bankruptcies, the lawsuits over Trump University and his early support for the Iraq war are facts.
The press should absolutely hold Trump accountable for his lies. But if the press is going to point out the lies, it must be clear about the difference between facts and speculation.
3
It's a little to late guys! The damage is done. It did not take genius to decide to back the person who has championed the worker, human rights and had approval ratings of more tha 70% as Secretary of State. The alternative is a Pinocchio who cannot separate truth and reality. He is a blend of Rob Ford and Rodrigo Duterte. He is ignorant of world affairs because he never travels. He thinks he is the center of the universe - he is a member of the flat earth society. And the media elevated him to the role of oracle. Serious reflection is replaced by fatuous Twittering - what better word for the mindless babble that saturates the ether!
5
Thank you Mr. Kristof. It may not have been your decision, but coupling he photograph of reporters surrounding Senator Joseph McCarthy with your article is on point.
McCarthy was great press and a divided country was ripe for the moral panic which the media spread. His exaggerations, lies and off the cuff confabulations, supported by the ‘alt-right’ of his day – including people who believed Dwight Eisenhower was a communist – destroyed many lives and threatened our First Amendment freedoms. Were there communists and fellow travelers in government? Alger Hiss is still controversial, but many other clearly innocent people were destroyed by his machine.
Now some on the ‘alt-right’ are trying to rehabilitate McCarthy’s reputation as they champion a candidate who, like McCarthy, employed Roy Cohn in his rise to power.
This is a tough year for the press. But for those who would pander or soft-peddle Trump’s lies, they should remember that someday they will be asked by their grandchildren, “What did you do in the election of 2016?" The Times should be commended for their editorial position on calling out Trump on his lies and kudos for collecting them in a weekly digest this week, lest we forget.
McCarthy was great press and a divided country was ripe for the moral panic which the media spread. His exaggerations, lies and off the cuff confabulations, supported by the ‘alt-right’ of his day – including people who believed Dwight Eisenhower was a communist – destroyed many lives and threatened our First Amendment freedoms. Were there communists and fellow travelers in government? Alger Hiss is still controversial, but many other clearly innocent people were destroyed by his machine.
Now some on the ‘alt-right’ are trying to rehabilitate McCarthy’s reputation as they champion a candidate who, like McCarthy, employed Roy Cohn in his rise to power.
This is a tough year for the press. But for those who would pander or soft-peddle Trump’s lies, they should remember that someday they will be asked by their grandchildren, “What did you do in the election of 2016?" The Times should be commended for their editorial position on calling out Trump on his lies and kudos for collecting them in a weekly digest this week, lest we forget.
2
I'm so glad that you've written this but honestly, we needed it a year ago. Mostly you folks have sat on your hands until the last few weeks & let the Donald grow. We have - what? - 45 days or so to undo the damage of doing nothing. Let's hope it works.
6
The reason only 6% of the public has confidence in the press is due the 24/7 propaganda of right wing media and the mainstream media's cowardice. The right reports everything from climate change to the current election as a "liberal conspiracy" while the mainstream media, too cowardly to call out the lies, basks in the orthodoxy of false equivalency. Thus, no one believes anything the press says.
The NYT is as guilty as anyone else. Finally admitting in print that Donald Trump is a liar this close to the election is too little too late. If, God forbid, Trump wins, the cowardly media along with alt-right propaganda which wasn't dismissed as false until very recently, will bear most of the blame.
The NYT is as guilty as anyone else. Finally admitting in print that Donald Trump is a liar this close to the election is too little too late. If, God forbid, Trump wins, the cowardly media along with alt-right propaganda which wasn't dismissed as false until very recently, will bear most of the blame.
5
I hope Lester Holt calls out the lies. But his experience is more in reading news and doing either short, light interviews for Today or pre-taped and tightly edited ones. And I wonder if NBC has told him to go for the truth or to go for even bigger ratings.
According to New York magazine, the reason Megyn Kelly and the other Fox anchors hit Trump so hard in that first Republican debate, is that Rupert Murdoch picked up the phone and instructed them too. This does not bode well for the final presidential debate, which will be moderated by Fox. It would seem to be a disqualifier.
According to New York magazine, the reason Megyn Kelly and the other Fox anchors hit Trump so hard in that first Republican debate, is that Rupert Murdoch picked up the phone and instructed them too. This does not bode well for the final presidential debate, which will be moderated by Fox. It would seem to be a disqualifier.
5
I am tired of all these polls and talk of third party candidates who can never win. Trump got a free ride from the media while Hillary got picked apart, all for the sake of ratings. That said I do not believe the average American is really foolish and so gullible. If people of all ages and race get out and vote Trump will loose big time.
5
Even in France we were given to read in our English class, 'Animal Farm' by Orwell, and recently reading his journalistic essays, it is his clarity and honesty that stand out and make an impact. Everything written is 'political' whether it be popular children's books, or the creation of an artist.
The Catholic nuns at school were political in their views, but kept these from the students until the riots broke out in 1968. and after filing in a row to watch the news on T.V. we were sent home to our families. My parents long divorced, American, living in other countries, this is what I remember:
- My friend from Vientiane invited me to stay with her and her siblings in Paris;
- The father of my best friend came to take me with his children to a retreat away from the demonstrations. Years later he brought his wife to New York and we had a wonderful reunion where I was able to thank them.
Everything that this businessman is ranting on about, tears at one's heart for it is not the America that I know. My Country has been kind and generous in heart and spirit, not only for those of us in The Humanitarian Community, but in the Private Sector as well. I do not wish to have my faith and conviction in my Country destroyed and tarnished.
It is hard, Mr. Kristof, for you to write it right but you are giving something to your Country. Something of value to your readership, while I am standing beside the Democratic Nominee at this time.
The Catholic nuns at school were political in their views, but kept these from the students until the riots broke out in 1968. and after filing in a row to watch the news on T.V. we were sent home to our families. My parents long divorced, American, living in other countries, this is what I remember:
- My friend from Vientiane invited me to stay with her and her siblings in Paris;
- The father of my best friend came to take me with his children to a retreat away from the demonstrations. Years later he brought his wife to New York and we had a wonderful reunion where I was able to thank them.
Everything that this businessman is ranting on about, tears at one's heart for it is not the America that I know. My Country has been kind and generous in heart and spirit, not only for those of us in The Humanitarian Community, but in the Private Sector as well. I do not wish to have my faith and conviction in my Country destroyed and tarnished.
It is hard, Mr. Kristof, for you to write it right but you are giving something to your Country. Something of value to your readership, while I am standing beside the Democratic Nominee at this time.
2
It seems to me that the coverage of the election has been on the cowardly side, but not the usual cowardice. In this case, the media is over-compensating for earlier acts of covering Trump as if he was serious by continuing to cover his most egregious statements and acts as straight news. As such this coverage is a great inducement to the opposition to support Clinton. It's a version of letting the readers decide which is suggested here. Unfortunately, the readers make up a small cross section of people who can be persuaded by logic. That time is over and it doesn't work very well especially this late in the cycle. It's time for the media to put its resources to work more directly in service to the country not by simply calling falsehoods because that's a trailing activity that too many don't pay attention to. More emphasis needs to be given to each candidate's record in concrete ways. This piece is a good start but there's much work to do and dwindling time. For instance, Trump is said to have a copy of Hitler's speeches. How do they compare? What do they say about a future with Trump as leader?
2
I am struck by the photograph accompanying this article which reminds me of a Nativity scene. Senator McCarthy, swathed in his dark suit, sits in the middle of a crowd of identically dressed reporters with their heads bowed (One genuflecting), notebooks out. These are serious men doing serious work. The lord's work in the presence of the lord. The only one smiling is the honey-blond in the top right corner. Obviously she is unimportant and can't be taken seriously. She is just an ornament.
Things have changed, mostly for the better, but have they changed enough? A woman may be our next President. Will the men in identical suits listen to her and report on who she is and what she plans to do if elected, rather than how she smiles, how she dresses, how likable she may be?
Things have changed, mostly for the better, but have they changed enough? A woman may be our next President. Will the men in identical suits listen to her and report on who she is and what she plans to do if elected, rather than how she smiles, how she dresses, how likable she may be?
2
I see a preacher, draped in a long robe with the initials NYT embroidered in the satin. He's looking up, speaking to the choir.
And down the street are other churches, and other choirs, with other preachers. They'll soon be eating casseroles. They've chosen their own places or worship.
And down the street are other churches, and other choirs, with other preachers. They'll soon be eating casseroles. They've chosen their own places or worship.
1
Sure. But at this point, anyone who doesn't know that Trump is a pathological liar simply doesn't want to know, or, more simply, insists on believing that he's telling the truth. According to polls, that's roughly half the country.
2
Do not treat them or judge them differently. Clinton running for President. Trump running for court jester
The other on PBS Gwen Ifill was doing a piece comparing Clinton's and Trump's policies, and the discussion progressed as if Donald Trump actually has policies. I wanted to scream. So this is another challenge for the media.
2
We need more than journalists to point out his lies...priests, ministers, actors, bishops, physicians, scientists, bar tenders, bowling partners, gunshop owners, soldiers, sailors, mothers, aunts, children, soothsayers, bond salesmen, authors, even bigots and swineherders, nuns and maybe at tomorrow's debate an old sex worker may rise up and shout together..THIS FRAUD SHALL NOT PASS!
Then maybe God will forget past crimes and ransome America's soul from this malicious captivity.
Then maybe God will forget past crimes and ransome America's soul from this malicious captivity.
2
I'm choosing not to watch the debates. Trump is everything noted in this article and worse. I'm choosing not to give him two precious hours of my life. I'm choosing not to hear his lies. I'm choosing my health, because my blood pressure would skyrocket listening to his ranting. I'm choosing not to let his poison into my mind and soul. I'm choosing her, and there is nothing in a debate that could change that.
3
Problem us no one trusts what the press has to say.
Democracy needs a free press precisely because the facts need to be available to all citizens. Journalists have a duty to the Constitution to present these. This is not the same as expressing their opinions, which most of the press seems to have jumbled together with facts - maybe because they're too lazy to do the research.
It isn't just Trump, although that is the clear and present issue. It is no accident the Holocaust Museum has us all start at one place - propaganda.
Hasn't anyone taken the trouble to look through the two parties' platforms? To read the Republican 2016 version, you would never know that the consequences of financial deregulation and 'voodoo economics' , with its enormous tax cuts for the wealthy (that only trickled up) and two unfunded wars, they are the party responsible for the bulk of our existing federal debt. When Regan came to office, it totaled $1 trillion and when he left it was $3; it doubled under GW Bush's administration and that doesn't even count the after-effects of the 2008 financial crisis. That is but one example, of many, where there seems a confidence that the public will not remember and the press will not remind.
What is a free press for, if not this?
It isn't just Trump, although that is the clear and present issue. It is no accident the Holocaust Museum has us all start at one place - propaganda.
Hasn't anyone taken the trouble to look through the two parties' platforms? To read the Republican 2016 version, you would never know that the consequences of financial deregulation and 'voodoo economics' , with its enormous tax cuts for the wealthy (that only trickled up) and two unfunded wars, they are the party responsible for the bulk of our existing federal debt. When Regan came to office, it totaled $1 trillion and when he left it was $3; it doubled under GW Bush's administration and that doesn't even count the after-effects of the 2008 financial crisis. That is but one example, of many, where there seems a confidence that the public will not remember and the press will not remind.
What is a free press for, if not this?
2
Hillary's baggage made Trump. Against a normal Democrat Presidential nominee Trump would not even be noticed.
1
I have said repeatedly that history will not judge journalism lightly, when it comes to this presidential campaign...or coverage of the huge GOP gerrymander of house seats, begun in 2010. You've made a good start with this piece.
We shall see how it plays out, over the next 40 days, starting with Monday night's debate.
Reflecting on your Edward R. Murrow quote about McCarthy's methods, one should bear in mind that Trump was advised repeatedly by 'his good friend Roy Cohn', who was McCarthy's junkyard dog in the 50's. So McCarthy's attack tactics are alive and well in Trump.
We shall see how it plays out, over the next 40 days, starting with Monday night's debate.
Reflecting on your Edward R. Murrow quote about McCarthy's methods, one should bear in mind that Trump was advised repeatedly by 'his good friend Roy Cohn', who was McCarthy's junkyard dog in the 50's. So McCarthy's attack tactics are alive and well in Trump.
2
Perhaps it can be suggested that Trump is showing signs of early Alzheimers as he seems to forget what the truth looks like.
Journalists are at their best when they reveal information, but I don't need them to tell me who is lying, or who is manipulating the rubes.
I don't rely on anyone to do my thinking for me. For example, Trump's words are all you need to hear. His attacks on minorities and immigrants from day one were enough for me not to support him.
There! That wasn't hard, was it?
I don't rely on anyone to do my thinking for me. For example, Trump's words are all you need to hear. His attacks on minorities and immigrants from day one were enough for me not to support him.
There! That wasn't hard, was it?
3
You cover a charlatan by stopping when they lie, pointing it out and asking for a retraction right there. Don't let them move forward. Turn off the mic. Allow others to explain the lie. Have a whole truth panel. But don't give the charlatan move air time for lying. He will want the mic and camera back and will quickly change tactics.
6
But if moderators stopped charlatans whenever they lied, we'd spent the entire 90 minutes on Hillary.
1
Absolutely right. And the NYT is part of it letting Trump have his way. When we readers want to comment on an article by saying what Trump is and wants to do as president our comments get censored away and are not published. This just happened to me when I commented on this debate nightmare article a few hours ago. The comment obviously being too critical on Trump was not published.
4
this election season, the country is desperate for a little boy to say the would be emperor has no clothes
1
Where is Edward R. Murrow when we need him most? During Murrow's heyday, journalism and the network news departments were not considered money makers but a public service. When television news became about ratings and advertising dollars, the integrity went out the window, and Murrow knew this. What our media has become is the equivalent to a sideshow now journalism. That's why so many Trump voters see Hillary Clinton as "dishonest" and worse. The whole "fair and balanced" is a cover for "what we think and believe, and so should you" and unfortunately a large portion of our citizens are easily fooled.
I'm sick of watching tv 'reporters' ask Kelliann Conway a direct question and then listening to her go off on some scripted lie and not be told on follow-up to answer the question! Time and again this farce has been played out, each actor in a role. Disgusting.
6
The best response true journalists can make to the demagoguery of Mr. Trump is minimization.
Old style: "Mr. Trump addressed supporters in XXX suggesting the imminent deportation of 11 million illegals and building a border wall at our southern border."
New style: "Mr. Trump addressed supporters in XXX about immigration."
While both statements would be true, the new style denies him the oxygen to fuel the conflagration he ignites. Just like the classical fire triangle (fuel + ignition + oxygen), Mr. Trump's ascendancy required a large disaffected minority + inflammatory remarks + publicity.
We cannot calm the populace with bread or circuses nor stop Mr. Trump's ranting, but we can refuse to amplify it's reach.
Old style: "Mr. Trump addressed supporters in XXX suggesting the imminent deportation of 11 million illegals and building a border wall at our southern border."
New style: "Mr. Trump addressed supporters in XXX about immigration."
While both statements would be true, the new style denies him the oxygen to fuel the conflagration he ignites. Just like the classical fire triangle (fuel + ignition + oxygen), Mr. Trump's ascendancy required a large disaffected minority + inflammatory remarks + publicity.
We cannot calm the populace with bread or circuses nor stop Mr. Trump's ranting, but we can refuse to amplify it's reach.
4
"Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling". Duh.
Why not just set up a camera and audio and walk away until the candidate has had his or her say - then broadcast it. Do the same for the opponent. Broadcast and we can decide.
Or have the candidates send you memos about their policies and appearances, and you can quit following them around - just publish their memos - we can decide.
I mean really, what do we need you for?
If you are not going to dig in, question, interview, ask the hard stuff, fact check, research, be prepared when you talk to them for us - that's what you do, you know - we really don't need you.
I have a busy life with my family, my job, my friends, my community, etc and I rely on you using your time AS your job to do all the digging I don't have time for so when you do talk to them, or write a column for us to read - you add something I cannot see for myself - information and background, and history and facts and confirmation (or not) and consistency (or not) to what the candidates are saying and doing.
The fact that you doubt this - that I am having to instruct you on what we expect from you - to give you permission to do what you should have been doing all along - what is basic journalism I would think - is mind boggling and scary - almost more scary than the men and women you are charged with covering.
Why not just set up a camera and audio and walk away until the candidate has had his or her say - then broadcast it. Do the same for the opponent. Broadcast and we can decide.
Or have the candidates send you memos about their policies and appearances, and you can quit following them around - just publish their memos - we can decide.
I mean really, what do we need you for?
If you are not going to dig in, question, interview, ask the hard stuff, fact check, research, be prepared when you talk to them for us - that's what you do, you know - we really don't need you.
I have a busy life with my family, my job, my friends, my community, etc and I rely on you using your time AS your job to do all the digging I don't have time for so when you do talk to them, or write a column for us to read - you add something I cannot see for myself - information and background, and history and facts and confirmation (or not) and consistency (or not) to what the candidates are saying and doing.
The fact that you doubt this - that I am having to instruct you on what we expect from you - to give you permission to do what you should have been doing all along - what is basic journalism I would think - is mind boggling and scary - almost more scary than the men and women you are charged with covering.
3
Trump enablers won't believe the press whatever it reports, lies or no lies. They pride themselves in sneering and smirking.
Forget the press; just vote NO.
Forget the press; just vote NO.
1
Thank you Mr. Kristof for once again standing up for truth and for reporting it.
2
You are entirely correct in stating, "Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling. As we move to the debates, let’s remember that to expose charlatans is not partisanship, but simply good journalism."
Alas, too many of those in the media, the Republican leadership, and the electeds on both sides of the aisle have given Trump a pass. He is a dangerous huckster, an embarrassment, and a latter day McCarthy. He richly deserves our contempt and repudiation.
Alas, too many of those in the media, the Republican leadership, and the electeds on both sides of the aisle have given Trump a pass. He is a dangerous huckster, an embarrassment, and a latter day McCarthy. He richly deserves our contempt and repudiation.
All political candidates say things like, “I’ll lower your taxes,” “I’ll abolish the Affordable Care Act,” or I’ll get rid of NAFTA.” A responsible journalist must insist that “I will” statements be rephrased as “I intend to work toward” assertions. No president can unilaterally change the tax code, repeal legislation, or invalidate United States trade or treaty obligations. Why does a responsible journalist let these declarations go unchallenged?
The discussion must focus on the fiscal and legislative ramifications of the complex issues that face our country. In Trump’s case, there is reason to question whether he even knows how these processes work. It is more than reasonable for a journalist to press him to explain how he intends to pursue his vague agenda.
Allowing these kinds of empty promises to go unchallenged has turned presidential elections into trite advertising campaigns. Even advertisers have to provide disclaimers in fine print. It is a sad state of affairs when presidential candidates are held to lower standards than pharmaceutical companies.
The discussion must focus on the fiscal and legislative ramifications of the complex issues that face our country. In Trump’s case, there is reason to question whether he even knows how these processes work. It is more than reasonable for a journalist to press him to explain how he intends to pursue his vague agenda.
Allowing these kinds of empty promises to go unchallenged has turned presidential elections into trite advertising campaigns. Even advertisers have to provide disclaimers in fine print. It is a sad state of affairs when presidential candidates are held to lower standards than pharmaceutical companies.
3
Thanks for presenting the case for even handed judgement of values over facts. Trump and his alt right campaigners are masters of manipulation and are reaping the rewards in an era when truth and critical thinking are losing the battle for authority.
We can easily perceive the difference in human values that these two candidates represent and must not lose that focus.
We can easily perceive the difference in human values that these two candidates represent and must not lose that focus.
The damage is most likely already done, trump has been treated as a normal candidate and Clinton has had everything in her past that is the slightest bit questionable covered non-stop. Clinton's policy positions are almost never mentioned, nor the fact that the Democratic Party platform is at least 80% aligned with Sanders.
The other sin of the media is not covering Sanders until it was too late - people in states with early primaries didn't know about him, so we got the weakest candidate.
I believe the Republicans wanted to run against Clinton and that was another reason to ignore Sanders.
And don't tell me the media is "liberal"! Individual reporters may be liberal, but the media as a whole is corporate and leans far to the right.
If trump is elected corporate media is at the top of the blame list!
The other sin of the media is not covering Sanders until it was too late - people in states with early primaries didn't know about him, so we got the weakest candidate.
I believe the Republicans wanted to run against Clinton and that was another reason to ignore Sanders.
And don't tell me the media is "liberal"! Individual reporters may be liberal, but the media as a whole is corporate and leans far to the right.
If trump is elected corporate media is at the top of the blame list!
1
Sounds to me like you know the media is NOT doing their job and you are just trying to excuse their poor performance.
I hope bad Mr. Trump doesn't bring up the Cascade Mall shooter's Tweet supporting Hillary, or the fact that the Orlando shooter's father was a big supporter. That would be deplorable.
This is yet another false equivalency. If millions support Mother Theresa or Mohandas Gandhi, there will still be a few horrific nutjobs somewhere in the mix.
The important difference here is that Mr. Trump actively encourages and then preys on the angry fears of the racists, misogynists, xenophobes, and other fans of conspiracy fantasies.
Secretary Clinton's huge mistake is calling Mr. Trump's victims deplorable. As dangerous as they are, these people are scared and feel helpless in the face of change. Mr Trump has duped them into thinking their weaknesses are strengths that should be admired and cultivated. He has convinced these poor people that he is their political Messiah, and they will forgive a lot of lies if it pays for salvation. Ultimately, this is how he would make these people not only easy to rule, but easy to turn against anyone who opposes him.
This is not the model of a leader, but of a tyrant. It is not a new model of governance. Find historical examples of democracies changing into dictatorships and you will find the pattern startlingly similar.
The important difference here is that Mr. Trump actively encourages and then preys on the angry fears of the racists, misogynists, xenophobes, and other fans of conspiracy fantasies.
Secretary Clinton's huge mistake is calling Mr. Trump's victims deplorable. As dangerous as they are, these people are scared and feel helpless in the face of change. Mr Trump has duped them into thinking their weaknesses are strengths that should be admired and cultivated. He has convinced these poor people that he is their political Messiah, and they will forgive a lot of lies if it pays for salvation. Ultimately, this is how he would make these people not only easy to rule, but easy to turn against anyone who opposes him.
This is not the model of a leader, but of a tyrant. It is not a new model of governance. Find historical examples of democracies changing into dictatorships and you will find the pattern startlingly similar.
1
Trump is going to start calling Hillary a liar. Well, she has lied, not as much as he did but still. So is he lying that she is a liar? Can he be called out for that? It will be difficult. There the problem is not so much that he is lying but that he engages in character assassination,.What the media does--"Yet I can see how the endless media coverage of Clinton’s email evasiveness might incline some casual voters to perceive Trump as the more honest figure."--is exactly Trump's strategy. He's lying no more than the media is lying about it. So the problem with trump is not so much falsehoods as it is character assassination. This is the Republican specialty. He learned it by watching Lee Atwater and Karl Rove. They got away with it as he gets away with it. What she needs to get at is character assassination: that's the technique on display with regard to the birther movement Trump started. And that's how Trump has to be taken down. It is the technique of the political hooligan and the fascist.
2
For journalists or news organizations, fear of Trump winning could become a thorny issue. As President in many ways he easily could badly damage them, their newspapers, or their network. In the past 12 months he easily destroyed the Republican primary candidates, redefined the Republican party, and dominated press coverage...all as an appetizer before dinner. The wounded ones have returned to him and licked his hand like a timid puppies.
Those in news reporting and comment have seen this. They are protecting a business, and they have families and a career. Nixon twisted the Washington Post after their Watergate reporting. Look at what Murrow's CBS corporation had to contend with 15 years before that. The second by second fine balance of "telling truth" and dealing with sensitive advertisers, and the public's perception and trust in their news corporation is real. High stakes and complex.
We have a noisy child on a long plane flight. We are a captive audience all forced to hear him for hours. Please someone, land the plane.
Those in news reporting and comment have seen this. They are protecting a business, and they have families and a career. Nixon twisted the Washington Post after their Watergate reporting. Look at what Murrow's CBS corporation had to contend with 15 years before that. The second by second fine balance of "telling truth" and dealing with sensitive advertisers, and the public's perception and trust in their news corporation is real. High stakes and complex.
We have a noisy child on a long plane flight. We are a captive audience all forced to hear him for hours. Please someone, land the plane.
2
Excellent column. If reporters, especially those on cable TV, would just ask good follow-up questions, that would be a tremendous improvement.
The problem is not just the total lack of challenges to Trump but that many individuuals and so called news outlets such as Fox and the stupid people on talk radio are supporters and enablers of Trump. There are no Edward R Murrow journalists now or no Ralph McGills of the Atlanta Constitution. The last journalist we had, and still have too seldom is Seymour Hersh. It is hardly surprising that only 62 % of the population believe Obama was born in the U.S because we have a population that is ignorant about everything except who is bobbing who or the latest movie star's bikini show. News reporters and business gave rise to Trump because they began talking about a politician as a brand or a ball park or other things by their brand names. In reality Trump is the politician the U.S. Needs to match the fraud the country represents to us and the world at large. We are not the great benefactor of the world we present ourselves as but the enemy of humanity.
There are a lot of people and organizations to blame for the current state of our politics and certainly the media is right near the top. Also, right up there beside them is the Republican Party and its array of denial legislation that has eroded the potential good inherent in the art of Democracy.
There are only two choices before the voters: Clinton or Trump. Let's hope that common sense prevails.
There are only two choices before the voters: Clinton or Trump. Let's hope that common sense prevails.
1
A quick review of the spectacle tomorrow night:
Everyone will be offended Trump showed up. Then the press will cover the outrage over his misogynist comments toward Hillary and women in general. Then there will be talking head critiques attempting to analyze who these Deplorables are without using the term. Maybe a slight smirk, a preganant pause, or deadpan look into the camera.
Essentially, the press will frame the Trump performance in an attempt to manipulate what we just watched into doubting our own memory, perception and sanity. Press-induced Political Correctness - a nuanced reality show presently all the rage with the Washington D.C. intellectuals.
Hillary will be declared the winner.
Trump will surge in the polls.
Everyone will be offended Trump showed up. Then the press will cover the outrage over his misogynist comments toward Hillary and women in general. Then there will be talking head critiques attempting to analyze who these Deplorables are without using the term. Maybe a slight smirk, a preganant pause, or deadpan look into the camera.
Essentially, the press will frame the Trump performance in an attempt to manipulate what we just watched into doubting our own memory, perception and sanity. Press-induced Political Correctness - a nuanced reality show presently all the rage with the Washington D.C. intellectuals.
Hillary will be declared the winner.
Trump will surge in the polls.
1
As Kristof notes, "fact-checking on the fly is difficult." But that is in cases where the statements are ambiguous. There is very little ambiguity in the falsehoods propagated by The Donald and it should be easy to call him out on those. At the risk of being too simplistic, I'd say that he utters a lie every five minutes or so, and hence, the moderator has to simply say "That's a lie" every five minutes or so.
2
He is a direct result of our fascination with reality TV and ratings driven so called "news shows". How many times have we watched the supposed political anchors like Chuck Todd interview Trump while he lies to their face and they at best look on mildly frustrated, never calling him out as a liar. They don't because they want the interviews for the ratings and are not willing to bite the hand that feeds them. They are the laughing stock and clowns that Trump plays like marionettes.
3
Sadly, it all boils down to a paycheck. Like the employees at Wells Fargo who were forced to create sham accounts to hold their job, a large number of "journalists" and media outlets just want to keep their paycheck coming and will knowingly bring this country down to achieve that. They should watch what they wish for... Trump as president will have no more use for them. I will be very sorry to see real journalists like Mr Kristoff disappear with them.
3
One question; in today's media circus known as "journalism" point out even one of these "talking heads" that could hold a match to Edward R. Murrow?
The silence tells me all.
The silence tells me all.
One candidate is a showman, huckster and snake oil salesman. He has never held a responsible public sector position and hence his mutterings are just that. On the contrary, the other aspirant has a public record of deceit, failure and mendacity. When you admit that the former has been a joke while the latter has been a deadly disservice to us, a betrayal of the public trust and therefore not a resume worthy of further disservice, you will have done your job. Any other tack and you will have cowardly served your flawed mistress' desperate power quest.
1
Ahh, the old false equivalency ruse.
1
I sometimes wonder if Trump supporters read the NY Times. If they do, do they believe or agree with anything written here? This is a fine sermon preached to the choir. Would that the unconverted be moved to repent.
While I admire Mr.Kristof for going to places where others fear to tread , agree with the writer, Jay, that NK is guttering in the same way as CNN in writing an extremely biased, unfair editorial against Trump. Have reservations re DT and his "courageous" progeny who seek to prove their "masculinity" by killing innocent animals in "canned hunting," but believe that one should not prejudge DT who deserves benefit of the doubt.Mr. Kristof is so willing to put us down,like his candidate, HRC,as "depolorable,racist, misogynistic," and victims of a "con artist"But who is the con artist here?NK lectures us on morality, and characterizes us Trump supporters as hostile to black America, while he lives in a lily white suburb similar to Westchester, sends his children to university at Yale and Harvard.R such reports false?Have I been misinformed? If record needs to be corrected, Mr. Kristof,please do so!"Handsome is as handsome does."We don't have the means to even send our kids to community college. We r too busy struggling to survive.
1
While calling them out, you are too generous to your peers on cable news channels. They are equally as greedy as their employers, seeking fame and fortune at the expense of truth and in the creation of a candidate. And, while it will be deemed chauvinist and politically incorrect, the women of Fox who pursued careers with Fox and allowed Ailes and others to behave as they did as long as they did, in silence, allowing the use of their legs to engender ratings, take a front-row seat in your line-up of journalistic frauds!
5
I don't know how much of a difference it will make unless other, smaller papers follow suit. Many minds around my workplace are already made up, and when I point out the bold faced lies, their response is either"he doesn't really mean it, h's just saying that" or "they all lie, it's part of the game, besides Hilllary lies about emails,or Benghazi or "
The people I'm talking about would never read the Times. Hopefully, other papers follow your example. Because the truth is, from MSNBC to your paper and many others, Trump played you all for the free publicity. Where we once smiled at him and his antics, thinking nobody would really vote for him, we've come to find that he is turning the tables and playing people out in the wide open. And closing in. Minds have been made up. Can you change them now? What happens if he wins? We sit in absolute total stunned silence while he puts his children in high offices and watch the likes of Christie and others be in the cabinet? Even Ted Cruz was probably offered a position which is why he changed his tune. We are close to catastrophe. The media bears the brunt in not calling on Trumps lies on the front page from the beginning.
The people I'm talking about would never read the Times. Hopefully, other papers follow your example. Because the truth is, from MSNBC to your paper and many others, Trump played you all for the free publicity. Where we once smiled at him and his antics, thinking nobody would really vote for him, we've come to find that he is turning the tables and playing people out in the wide open. And closing in. Minds have been made up. Can you change them now? What happens if he wins? We sit in absolute total stunned silence while he puts his children in high offices and watch the likes of Christie and others be in the cabinet? Even Ted Cruz was probably offered a position which is why he changed his tune. We are close to catastrophe. The media bears the brunt in not calling on Trumps lies on the front page from the beginning.
5
If there is a single issue in modern American history that calls out for journalists to report the truth, Trump is it. "False equivalency" is partly based on "equal air time," but common sense tells us there are clear limits to this. "Opinion"-based media like Fox and right-wing radio talk shows have been spewing lies for decades, and there is nothing we can do about this except stand up to them with the truth. I will watch the first Presidential debate (from Australia, and taking a day off from work to do it) with enormous interest, because it will be unfiltered by the media. With one exception: the moderator, who damned well better ask follow-up questions when the candidate fails to answer. And who damned well better not ask any "softball" questions, or display the slightest posture toward false equivalency. This moderator has the opportunity to go down in history as an Edward Murrow or Walter Cronkite, and do our nation enormous service. If he fails, Trump may be our next President of the United States.
9
Nick, good and honest journalists are always silenced by the honchos who run tv. studios, mainly Fox tv. with it's owner Rupert Murdoch who literally tolerated Roger Ailes's sexual harassments of female reporters and anchors because he was quite happy that Roger was peddling totally dishonest information that Bush was manufacturing at the run up to the Iraq war which they fed us.
Fox tv. fed us total lies about Iraqis "will be waiting with flowers in their hands" and not bombs, like you said here.
We see the same scenarios now when the tv. honchos and Newspaper bigwigs are all pandering to Trump's total lies and spewing misinformation because that's what most of the boring Americans want to hear.
If any of the journalists stood up to Trump and told him upfront that they'll not print or quote anything that Trump says on a daily basis unless they're backed by Politifact.com or by other fact checkers, Trump would've never gotten any traction in the polls.
Not even in the Primaries.
Result being we've a buffoon called Trump who's polling higher than Hillary in some states.
And that is totally ridiculous.
It should've never happened in American elections, let alone the Presidential one.
So as we can see from your article that demagogues like Trump should be challenged just like Joseph McCarthy was challenged by Edward R. Murrow.
But then on other hand I was totally stunned in '03 when the journalists didn't catch Bush's lies about Saddam's 'Weapons of mass destruction'.
Fox tv. fed us total lies about Iraqis "will be waiting with flowers in their hands" and not bombs, like you said here.
We see the same scenarios now when the tv. honchos and Newspaper bigwigs are all pandering to Trump's total lies and spewing misinformation because that's what most of the boring Americans want to hear.
If any of the journalists stood up to Trump and told him upfront that they'll not print or quote anything that Trump says on a daily basis unless they're backed by Politifact.com or by other fact checkers, Trump would've never gotten any traction in the polls.
Not even in the Primaries.
Result being we've a buffoon called Trump who's polling higher than Hillary in some states.
And that is totally ridiculous.
It should've never happened in American elections, let alone the Presidential one.
So as we can see from your article that demagogues like Trump should be challenged just like Joseph McCarthy was challenged by Edward R. Murrow.
But then on other hand I was totally stunned in '03 when the journalists didn't catch Bush's lies about Saddam's 'Weapons of mass destruction'.
2
This is broader than covering Trump. This is about covering all public officials and candidates for office. If the media does will not hold them accountable for telling the truth, then there's really not much point to having a media, we can all just wait for press releases.
4
I remember, as a little girl, watching Milton Berle. He was very silly and made me laugh. As one point, he would yell "Make up" and someone would come out with a big powder puff and slam Berle across the face with it. Everybody laughed. It's sort of like now. When Trump makes one of his mind bending remarks or his version of "Make Up", out comes the big powder puff, we all giggle and on to the next bit of insanity. Berle was sweet, funny and totally lovable. Trump is none of those things. He is a very disturbed man who potentially could have the fate of the world in his hands. The thought of him and his creepy kids sitting in the oval office making plans for our future is breaking my heart. Oh...one other thing that bugs me. When asked about his daughter Ivanka, he said that if she was not his daughter, he would be dating her. There is word that begins with i that describes this creep. He doesn't belong in the Oval Office, he belongs in a rubber room.
4
Yes, the fact that sexual remarks about his own daughter don't faze some voters is pretty worrisome.
3
"Good journalism is challenging."
Granted, but IT'S YOUR JOB and your profession has been terrible at it for a while, especially during this election cycle, otherwise we wouldn't be forced to choose between an absurd maybe-billionaire, politically incoherent, orange baffoon populist and an ethically challenged, warmongering, Goldman Sachs establishment multi-millionaire as the two major party candidates.
So, thanks a lot and don't cry me a river.
Whose fault do you think it is that the electorate is largely clueless?
"Only 6 percent of Americans say they have a great deal of confidence in the press" says it all.
And, yes, "fact-checking on the fly is difficult" even though "Clinton supporters are trying to goad the media to thump Trump", the moderator's job is to present the topics, ensure that the rules are followed, to keep candidates within the time limit set, make sure each candidate gets equal time and a chance to respond to each other, not to participate in the debate, nor to adjudicate on the points being made by interjecting with opinions or what they feel are facts.
The "truth is sometimes in the eye of the beholder."
For months now your profession has been serving us navel–gazing tabloid journalism, that often didn't even qualify as "stenography", full of "partisanship", rarely resembling "good journalism".
So please excuse me if I have very little faith in your profession suddenly living up to its promise as the Fourth Estate in the upcoming debate and beyond.
Granted, but IT'S YOUR JOB and your profession has been terrible at it for a while, especially during this election cycle, otherwise we wouldn't be forced to choose between an absurd maybe-billionaire, politically incoherent, orange baffoon populist and an ethically challenged, warmongering, Goldman Sachs establishment multi-millionaire as the two major party candidates.
So, thanks a lot and don't cry me a river.
Whose fault do you think it is that the electorate is largely clueless?
"Only 6 percent of Americans say they have a great deal of confidence in the press" says it all.
And, yes, "fact-checking on the fly is difficult" even though "Clinton supporters are trying to goad the media to thump Trump", the moderator's job is to present the topics, ensure that the rules are followed, to keep candidates within the time limit set, make sure each candidate gets equal time and a chance to respond to each other, not to participate in the debate, nor to adjudicate on the points being made by interjecting with opinions or what they feel are facts.
The "truth is sometimes in the eye of the beholder."
For months now your profession has been serving us navel–gazing tabloid journalism, that often didn't even qualify as "stenography", full of "partisanship", rarely resembling "good journalism".
So please excuse me if I have very little faith in your profession suddenly living up to its promise as the Fourth Estate in the upcoming debate and beyond.
9
"If a known con artist peddles a potion that he claims will make people lose 25 pounds and enjoy a better sex life, we don’t just quote the man and a critic; we find ways to signal to readers that he’s a fraud."
It shows that reasonable people, reasonable media nowadays, do not have confidence in their reasoning. They do just quote the snake oil salesman. They do not find ways to signal to readers that he's a fraud. Some of us have known that. As asymmetric polarization went on, we knew the media did not have the courage to say: the Republicans are engaged in conflict extension rather than compromise. Unfortunately, our Palliative In Chief, Barak Obama, tarred his own party in Congress with the same brush that he tarred Congress, that Congress wasn't being bipartisan. Rather than doing what Kristof said, finding a way to show that Republican claims of bipartisanship were fraudulent Obama let that charge go out to Democrats and Republicans alike.
Three cheers for Kristof here, trying to save the country from a huge mistake.
Definitely this one will be on the media if Hillary loses. Hillary loses, America loses.
It shows that reasonable people, reasonable media nowadays, do not have confidence in their reasoning. They do just quote the snake oil salesman. They do not find ways to signal to readers that he's a fraud. Some of us have known that. As asymmetric polarization went on, we knew the media did not have the courage to say: the Republicans are engaged in conflict extension rather than compromise. Unfortunately, our Palliative In Chief, Barak Obama, tarred his own party in Congress with the same brush that he tarred Congress, that Congress wasn't being bipartisan. Rather than doing what Kristof said, finding a way to show that Republican claims of bipartisanship were fraudulent Obama let that charge go out to Democrats and Republicans alike.
Three cheers for Kristof here, trying to save the country from a huge mistake.
Definitely this one will be on the media if Hillary loses. Hillary loses, America loses.
4
Then you and your colleagues should DO IT! Don't just talk about it.
6
The media is already doing what you suggest. Headline after headline must now obligatorily refer to Trump as a liar. But it is not working and it won't work. Trump may very well be the most brazenly dishonest politician in a lifetime, but the media itself lacks any credibility. First, no objective standard by which to compare honesty of politicians exists. No, none of the so-called "fact checkers" are objective. Second, you have so brazenly taken the side of Democrats, that at least half the country no longer accords you any respect. What Candy Crowley did during the presidential debate in 2012 should have been a crisis for journalism, but you treat as no big deal, because after all it was for a good cause, right? Where were you when President Obama was lying that we could all keep our insurance and our doctor? You don't get to decide what lies are acceptable and what aren't. You should be calling balls and strikes. So go ahead and signal your dismay all you want, because your signals are just noise now.
2
As we all know a lie will be around the world three times before the truth has its boots on.
Still, there is something about the media making a liar a big thing.
The more you demonize a liar, a fraud, a con artist or a criminal, the more people will be fascinated and the more an old marketing slogan becomes real "There is no better news than bad news".
So the only thing a media person can be done in this case is risky and that is to fully document the issue and send a dossier to a state attorney.
That is what used to be called investigative journalism.
Whining about how bad the Drumpf is, is all well and a nice intellectual exercise, but if you really want something done, don't talk about it, get to it and get your hands dirty.
Trump has played the media for ages and the media has willingly played along as created sales and worked great as a clickbait.
The media hates gossip but loves a bit of a scandal while Trump does not fear nothing more than a scandal that blows into his face.
His business model is based on balancing along an edge that provides lots of gossip and only hints at a potential scandal while running his Ponzi scheme and while doing his thing.
So if you, the journalist who wants to stop this fraud from becoming the president, want to see results, stop whining and get your hands dirty.
Publish the material you have investigated and send a copy to the state attorney and have them decide if this is enough to get Trump in court and jail.
Still, there is something about the media making a liar a big thing.
The more you demonize a liar, a fraud, a con artist or a criminal, the more people will be fascinated and the more an old marketing slogan becomes real "There is no better news than bad news".
So the only thing a media person can be done in this case is risky and that is to fully document the issue and send a dossier to a state attorney.
That is what used to be called investigative journalism.
Whining about how bad the Drumpf is, is all well and a nice intellectual exercise, but if you really want something done, don't talk about it, get to it and get your hands dirty.
Trump has played the media for ages and the media has willingly played along as created sales and worked great as a clickbait.
The media hates gossip but loves a bit of a scandal while Trump does not fear nothing more than a scandal that blows into his face.
His business model is based on balancing along an edge that provides lots of gossip and only hints at a potential scandal while running his Ponzi scheme and while doing his thing.
So if you, the journalist who wants to stop this fraud from becoming the president, want to see results, stop whining and get your hands dirty.
Publish the material you have investigated and send a copy to the state attorney and have them decide if this is enough to get Trump in court and jail.
1
Truth-telling? Nicholas Kristof, if that is your job, you are fired. In all fairness,
your opinion probably represents most TIMES' readers opinions, but it is
slanted in favor of Hillary. It is a given that Hillary will get the
endorsement of the TIMES. I have been a TIMES reader since the
ice age. The paper has been wrong in the past, and it will be
wrong in the future.See Laurel Leff's book, "Buried by the Times."
your opinion probably represents most TIMES' readers opinions, but it is
slanted in favor of Hillary. It is a given that Hillary will get the
endorsement of the TIMES. I have been a TIMES reader since the
ice age. The paper has been wrong in the past, and it will be
wrong in the future.See Laurel Leff's book, "Buried by the Times."
1
Kristof says journalists should look to uncover the comparative truths of Hillary vs Donald and then goes on to show us how by donning some deeply colored glasses when examining his preferred candidate.
He quotes his recent article where he claims that Hillary is a comparative beacon of truth compared to Donald, and he quotes "fact checkers" to prove this. These "fact checkers" themselves lack any real standards other than the will to promote their political ideals by selling poorly conceived editorials as something more than what they are. They are constantly riddled with selection bias, confirmation bias, liberties with context, and selective use of evidence.
Kristof is wrong when he identifies Trump as a 'Teflon' candidate. His polls dive every time he's went after Gold Star Parents, accused a Mexican judge of treating him unfairly, or flip-flopped on some issue. What makes his polls recover is when Hillary does or says something that shows that she too is a terrible candidate.
What's Kristof ignoring about Hillary? Pretty much everyone not inside the RDF of beltway media. The purpose of Hillary's private email server was to control information related to the conduct of her State department with blatant disregard to laws on disclosure and public information. She did it to escape scrutiny.
We know she lied about Benghazi and the motivation of the attacks and we know she's approved arms deals only after nations have donated to her family's "charity"
He quotes his recent article where he claims that Hillary is a comparative beacon of truth compared to Donald, and he quotes "fact checkers" to prove this. These "fact checkers" themselves lack any real standards other than the will to promote their political ideals by selling poorly conceived editorials as something more than what they are. They are constantly riddled with selection bias, confirmation bias, liberties with context, and selective use of evidence.
Kristof is wrong when he identifies Trump as a 'Teflon' candidate. His polls dive every time he's went after Gold Star Parents, accused a Mexican judge of treating him unfairly, or flip-flopped on some issue. What makes his polls recover is when Hillary does or says something that shows that she too is a terrible candidate.
What's Kristof ignoring about Hillary? Pretty much everyone not inside the RDF of beltway media. The purpose of Hillary's private email server was to control information related to the conduct of her State department with blatant disregard to laws on disclosure and public information. She did it to escape scrutiny.
We know she lied about Benghazi and the motivation of the attacks and we know she's approved arms deals only after nations have donated to her family's "charity"
1
A rating driven Press may have helped create Donald Trump and which may now not be doing enough to keep this lying narcissistic charlatan from becoming President but ultimately it is the willful ignorance, indifference, bigotry, hate, and hypocrisy of millions of Americans that will bear ultimate responsibility if he becomes President.
A country is only as good as the people who live in it and this election is not just about what kind of Country we want to be but also about what kind of Country we are. That Trump has gotten even this far says it is not the kind of Country I am proud to be par of.
A country is only as good as the people who live in it and this election is not just about what kind of Country we want to be but also about what kind of Country we are. That Trump has gotten even this far says it is not the kind of Country I am proud to be par of.
4
The Washington Post has been publishing most of the important stories in this election, tracking and exposing a number of Trump's ugliest deceptions.
Why is that? Why are they out there all alone?
Why is that? Why are they out there all alone?
6
When I came to this country in 1964 American journalism for me felt like a breath of fresh air. I am not writing this in absolute terms, but in comparison to what journalism was in the country, Italy, I came from. The reporting there was a conditional reporting, within the same article, of facts as interpreted or colored by the writer, the ultimate effect being that reading the same facts on different newspapers resulted in a denial of logical thought.
It was great entertainment compared to the dull reading that I found here, but at least after sampling a few news sources, I was satisfied that my chosen newspaper would report facts (btw, not an easy task). Then of course there would be the opinion pages, needless to say 'opinionated', but separate on separate pages and on which I could continuously form my own views ( by the way I also took care of reading the opinions of others).
Today I can see that, not just of late, news are entertainment and that is the big problem, to publish a list that contests the veracity of this or that candidate is an afterthought that requires an effort that the majority will not sustain or not even bother to follow.
What is missing is a dynamic, on the spot, factual contesting of statements that if refuted (as in a debate) should on the fly be called what they are. Reporting on a rally the TV news person should not just engage on he said, she said, but immediately label the 'said'. The technology is there, don't let the charlatan misuse it.
It was great entertainment compared to the dull reading that I found here, but at least after sampling a few news sources, I was satisfied that my chosen newspaper would report facts (btw, not an easy task). Then of course there would be the opinion pages, needless to say 'opinionated', but separate on separate pages and on which I could continuously form my own views ( by the way I also took care of reading the opinions of others).
Today I can see that, not just of late, news are entertainment and that is the big problem, to publish a list that contests the veracity of this or that candidate is an afterthought that requires an effort that the majority will not sustain or not even bother to follow.
What is missing is a dynamic, on the spot, factual contesting of statements that if refuted (as in a debate) should on the fly be called what they are. Reporting on a rally the TV news person should not just engage on he said, she said, but immediately label the 'said'. The technology is there, don't let the charlatan misuse it.
1
Often applied to Reagan and Trump, Teflon gets a bum rap. It only stops grease from sticking, not truth or accountability, which reflect the supporters, reporters and public memory. Otherwise, climate change, gun control and immigration could be labelled as Teflon issues. Why wouldn't people believe in candidate Trump when past polls have indicated substantial segments of the public believe in ghosts, angels, fairies etc. ?
3
I think the issue here really is that Trump isn't actually lying, he is just ignorant. Whereas Clinton appears to have memory problems and covering up.
Neither, to me, seems fit to be President. But what choice do we get? Once again hoodwinked by the two party machine.
Neither, to me, seems fit to be President. But what choice do we get? Once again hoodwinked by the two party machine.
1
Perhaps you don't remember Mr. Trump's lie that he saw Muslims out celebrating in NJ when the World Trade Center fell? There are a multitude of other things he's said that indicate lies or memory problems for Mr. Trump. He is also ignorant, a boor and makes fun of the disabled. Is this really who you want representing our country?
1
Mr Krystof:
You have to trust your readers and your readers have to trust you. The job of the newspaper is to provide accurate, timely information and the job of the readers is to act appropriately on that information. It is your duty to accurately report what Mr. Trump says. If you think that he made an inaccurate statement, you must verify the inaccuracy and present this as well as his statements to your readers. Then your readers must decide on their own what to believe. If you try to tell your readers what to believe, you lose your most valuable asset: your credibility. If your readers don't believe you, you need to find out why. If you made an error, you must quickly acknowledge and correct it. If the readers make an error, all you can do is provide them the raw facts with context and hope that they will eventually draw the correct conclusion. If you are consistently accurate in your reporting and have credibility, they will eventually come around.
You have to trust your readers and your readers have to trust you. The job of the newspaper is to provide accurate, timely information and the job of the readers is to act appropriately on that information. It is your duty to accurately report what Mr. Trump says. If you think that he made an inaccurate statement, you must verify the inaccuracy and present this as well as his statements to your readers. Then your readers must decide on their own what to believe. If you try to tell your readers what to believe, you lose your most valuable asset: your credibility. If your readers don't believe you, you need to find out why. If you made an error, you must quickly acknowledge and correct it. If the readers make an error, all you can do is provide them the raw facts with context and hope that they will eventually draw the correct conclusion. If you are consistently accurate in your reporting and have credibility, they will eventually come around.
The only value of quality journalism, especially in a time of social media, is to state the truth. There is really no other task. There are so many better players when it comes to entertainment and myth making.
3
Bravo, Mr Kristof. It is about time. With less than two months before the election, let us hope that the"newspaper of record" will be finally taking its responsibilities seriously in the remaining days and justifying that appellation.
3
Mr. Kristoff...sorry, but the American people have been ill-served by the
media coverage of both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton during this election cycle. The American public, at least those who take things like a presidential election seriously, don't need the media to fact check, analyze and scrutinize every utterance out of the mouths of the candidates.
media coverage of both Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton during this election cycle. The American public, at least those who take things like a presidential election seriously, don't need the media to fact check, analyze and scrutinize every utterance out of the mouths of the candidates.
Still think that one of the lasting sources of Donald Trump's popularity in this contest is racism ... white men's and women's defense of their own clan. American racism is under our feet all the time, like a vast, dirty aquifer, it's in the water we use on our lawns and cornfields, and Trump knows how to plumb it.
2
Are those print reporters surrounding McCarthy? The problem this time around is getting TV outlets to level with the public.
This runs against the nature of the medium, which is to project moving images that create the impression of new realities.
Now we need the opposite: a moment when the cameras pull back and we see what's not on the set.
This runs against the nature of the medium, which is to project moving images that create the impression of new realities.
Now we need the opposite: a moment when the cameras pull back and we see what's not on the set.
2
So we need a president who, while talking to the FBI, said she could not remember 39 times. She cannot even remember taking a training on how to handle confidential materials while running the state department. It is laughable that anyone would even consider voting for her. If the FBI told me they were going to investigate me and I responded by destroying my computer and hard drives I would go to prison forthwith. Just because trash is being shoveled at us by high ranking members of the government and writers such as you does not mean we have to chew on it and call it candy. Clinton may win this election and it will be a shame if she does, she does not deserve this office no matter who her opponent is.
1
And what about the very dangerous positions that he has claimed to favor that just disappear without challenge? He has suggested that the United States might make it a policy to refuse to pay the full amount promised on US Treasury bills. This is perhaps the most dangerous idea ever proposed by a presidential candidate. I haven´t seen any explanation or coverage of what that would do to the world financial system. He tosses out ideas like this and he gets by without having to explain and defend his statements over and over again. Every irrational, crackpot idea should be exposed by the press. How does he get by with it? Why does the press fail to take these ideas seriously and respond accordingly? I fear the debates will be more of the same. Brace yourselves. There will be plenty of garbage word salad and the moderators will not say just what do you mean by that? How would that work?
2
Nick, you & my other favorite NYT columnists have been doing your job for quite some time now; the problem is the Americans who read & ignore the warnings.
Back in Michigan I have in storage a bound copy of the Atlantic Monthly from the late 1930's. In one edition there was an article from "Dr. X" - a Jewish doctor who had been imprisoned by the Nazis and, since he was one of the earlier ones, managed to be released and emigrate to the US. His article describes in detail the pre-death-camp conditions of Nazi imprisonment; even though it was prior to the "final solution," it was horrific.
Even after this article had been published, Americans chose instead to give in to the fear, and to reject opening the country to more Jewish refugees. After all, there could be Nazis or Communists hiding among them. Better to play it safe.
Same M.O., different era. Stir up as much fear as possible and offer yourself as the one thing that can keep the fearful safe. Works like a charm.
As for Trump's motivation - it is clearly revenge. Anyone who saw his face during Obama's take-down of this arrogant buffoon during the 2011 Correspondents Dinner can easily understand how Donald Trump operates: "Oh yeah? Well, I'll show YOU!"
Keep doing your job well, Mr. K - but in the end, it's up to the American people. I hope they follow your example and make a wise choice.
Back in Michigan I have in storage a bound copy of the Atlantic Monthly from the late 1930's. In one edition there was an article from "Dr. X" - a Jewish doctor who had been imprisoned by the Nazis and, since he was one of the earlier ones, managed to be released and emigrate to the US. His article describes in detail the pre-death-camp conditions of Nazi imprisonment; even though it was prior to the "final solution," it was horrific.
Even after this article had been published, Americans chose instead to give in to the fear, and to reject opening the country to more Jewish refugees. After all, there could be Nazis or Communists hiding among them. Better to play it safe.
Same M.O., different era. Stir up as much fear as possible and offer yourself as the one thing that can keep the fearful safe. Works like a charm.
As for Trump's motivation - it is clearly revenge. Anyone who saw his face during Obama's take-down of this arrogant buffoon during the 2011 Correspondents Dinner can easily understand how Donald Trump operates: "Oh yeah? Well, I'll show YOU!"
Keep doing your job well, Mr. K - but in the end, it's up to the American people. I hope they follow your example and make a wise choice.
2
Charlatans typically scam the most vulnerable, desperate and clueless. Think fortune-tellers, faith healers, the leaders of the organised religions. And some start wars.
The problem, however, is not the charlatan. One charlatan on his or her own can't do any more than the rest of us. Charlatans need willing dupes.
Clinton would be a vastly superior choice than her opponent. Nevertheless, both Clintons, in different ways, are also charlatans. As was Baby Bush. As was Nixon and was Reagan.
Obama, Senior Bush, Carter are/were not charlatans. Most Americans, however, don't care if POTUS is a charlatan (so long as she or he is their charlatan) any more than they care that their religious leaders are charlatans. Many Americans typically can't even be bothered to vote and many won't bother for this coming election.
The problem is not the charlatans. The problem is us.
The problem, however, is not the charlatan. One charlatan on his or her own can't do any more than the rest of us. Charlatans need willing dupes.
Clinton would be a vastly superior choice than her opponent. Nevertheless, both Clintons, in different ways, are also charlatans. As was Baby Bush. As was Nixon and was Reagan.
Obama, Senior Bush, Carter are/were not charlatans. Most Americans, however, don't care if POTUS is a charlatan (so long as she or he is their charlatan) any more than they care that their religious leaders are charlatans. Many Americans typically can't even be bothered to vote and many won't bother for this coming election.
The problem is not the charlatans. The problem is us.
131
Sadly, your list is revealing and true.
The non-charlatans (as you label them, but that's another argument) are in general too honest to succeed. Interesting.
The odd man out is Obama, whose sense of humor and brilliant communication skills allowed him to be a crossover talent. There is no hope that Hillary can adopt his level of charisma.
I like her a lot more when she is quietly responding with her obvious intelligent. I hope she doesn't try bombast: she's lousy at it!
The non-charlatans (as you label them, but that's another argument) are in general too honest to succeed. Interesting.
The odd man out is Obama, whose sense of humor and brilliant communication skills allowed him to be a crossover talent. There is no hope that Hillary can adopt his level of charisma.
I like her a lot more when she is quietly responding with her obvious intelligent. I hope she doesn't try bombast: she's lousy at it!
I personally don't do gender-based politics. And I don't do race-based politics either although I voted for Obama each time. And of course he's been a real disappointment. But the Congress also had a part in that... Education is paramount in a "democratic" society. "Spin" is endemic to 24/7 reporting and what we're really seeking is the truth, right?
If a journalist's job is not stenography but truth telling, how should the moderator and other journalists cover Hillary Clinton?
Hillary Clinton is the establishment candidate. Establishment politics have not served America well. Would an Edward R. Murrow say, “This is no time for men who oppose establishment politics to keep silent."
Journalists have a role to play and that role is to tell the truth. The first part of telling the truth is to report the debate accurately. That's the easy part. The second part of telling the truth is to evaluate each candidate's performance fairly. That's the more difficult part. A fair evaluation begins with applying the same objective standard to each candidate's performance, debate question by debate question, answer by answer. A fair evaluation includes fact checking as well as a consideration of whether the answer was responsive and included a factual basis for stated conclusions and opinions.
A fair evaluation is not asking an equal number of Republican and Democratic partisan pundits, "Who won? State the reasons for your answer in 25 seconds or less."
Hillary Clinton is the establishment candidate. Establishment politics have not served America well. Would an Edward R. Murrow say, “This is no time for men who oppose establishment politics to keep silent."
Journalists have a role to play and that role is to tell the truth. The first part of telling the truth is to report the debate accurately. That's the easy part. The second part of telling the truth is to evaluate each candidate's performance fairly. That's the more difficult part. A fair evaluation begins with applying the same objective standard to each candidate's performance, debate question by debate question, answer by answer. A fair evaluation includes fact checking as well as a consideration of whether the answer was responsive and included a factual basis for stated conclusions and opinions.
A fair evaluation is not asking an equal number of Republican and Democratic partisan pundits, "Who won? State the reasons for your answer in 25 seconds or less."
1
Thanks for this solid, important piece. But what a shame that the Times as a whole does not share this valuable perspective. Witness your Public Editor's recent, execrable post defending a supposedly even-handed approach to covering the candidates and claiming that journalists should not pass judgment in how they go about undertaking such coverage. She partly justified her perspective by citing fellow Times journalists who share it.
For newspaper coverage of the election, I'm going to the Washington Postas the single most valuable outlet. It has been much more aggressive, expansive and persistent than the Times in exposing Trump's lies and corruption, digging into a given story for more than a headline or a day. When the history of the print media's coverage of this election is written, the Post's record will shine. The Times? Sadly, not so much.
Or to put the point another way, Nick: When it comes to criticizing journalism's approach to Trump, start with your own paper.
For newspaper coverage of the election, I'm going to the Washington Postas the single most valuable outlet. It has been much more aggressive, expansive and persistent than the Times in exposing Trump's lies and corruption, digging into a given story for more than a headline or a day. When the history of the print media's coverage of this election is written, the Post's record will shine. The Times? Sadly, not so much.
Or to put the point another way, Nick: When it comes to criticizing journalism's approach to Trump, start with your own paper.
3
American journalists have been painfully slow in showing as much enthusiasm for exposing Donald Trump’s lies as they have for mindlessly devoting ink and free airtime to his outrageous, made-for-TV rallies.
Donald Trump -- the con artist with his profanity, lies, bigotry and calls for violence – is the creation of the media. The fact of that journalistic malpractice will be part of American history for generations to come.
The notion that reporters must always avoid being judgmental is silly. As long as a reporter makes it clear which parts of his filed story are a chronicling of what actually happened and which parts are his opinion of the significance of what happened, there is no problem.
For journalists like Nicholas Kristof, who writes a regular column containing fact and opinion, the problem seems non-existent to us laymen.
Donald Trump -- the con artist with his profanity, lies, bigotry and calls for violence – is the creation of the media. The fact of that journalistic malpractice will be part of American history for generations to come.
The notion that reporters must always avoid being judgmental is silly. As long as a reporter makes it clear which parts of his filed story are a chronicling of what actually happened and which parts are his opinion of the significance of what happened, there is no problem.
For journalists like Nicholas Kristof, who writes a regular column containing fact and opinion, the problem seems non-existent to us laymen.
2
So about 45 days before the election, the press is just discovering this?! Too bad for the nation that Clinton has already been constantly besmirched and demonized by Trump and his smarmy surrogates. Where was the press BEFORE our young people got the idea that emails were somehow responsible for war, death, and all the evil in the world, as Trump keeps shouting? It may be too late for the media to reign in what it has let run loose in our nation, but for the sake of all of our futures I certainly hope there are some out there who will at least try.
3
Kristoff is correct. But journalists do a lot worse.
Yes, they often fail to challenge a candidate when he lies. This is lamentable. When a pol's lie is unchallenged, the truth dies.
Kristoff is complaining of journalistic passivity. But journalists do far worse than abet and aid a candidate's lies by not contesting them.
Sometimes, journalists have actively intervened in campaigns to knowingly make false charges about a candidate to demolish his candidacy. I REFER YOU TO an article on PAGE ONE of the NY TIMES on either the WEDNESDAY or THURSDAY immediately following the Iowa caucuses of 2004. The Times article was a curious report about men and women of the press. The article reported that on the night of the Iowa Caucuses, a bunch of media people (I don't remember exactly how the article referred to them except by noting their involvement in news making) congratulated themselves on how they unfairly reported Dean's campaign and destroyed his future in presidential politics. If Dean had gotten the nomination, instead of Kerry (who was such a lightweight of a campaigner that he did not fully challenge Bush's fabricated swiftboat scandal until after the election), he could have beaten W and maybe we wouldn't have had the great recession.
Sometimes, the media's fabrications are very potent because they're so subtle: In the 60's, some radio and TV outlets upped the treble when leftists spoke so they would appear immature or nervous.
Yes, they often fail to challenge a candidate when he lies. This is lamentable. When a pol's lie is unchallenged, the truth dies.
Kristoff is complaining of journalistic passivity. But journalists do far worse than abet and aid a candidate's lies by not contesting them.
Sometimes, journalists have actively intervened in campaigns to knowingly make false charges about a candidate to demolish his candidacy. I REFER YOU TO an article on PAGE ONE of the NY TIMES on either the WEDNESDAY or THURSDAY immediately following the Iowa caucuses of 2004. The Times article was a curious report about men and women of the press. The article reported that on the night of the Iowa Caucuses, a bunch of media people (I don't remember exactly how the article referred to them except by noting their involvement in news making) congratulated themselves on how they unfairly reported Dean's campaign and destroyed his future in presidential politics. If Dean had gotten the nomination, instead of Kerry (who was such a lightweight of a campaigner that he did not fully challenge Bush's fabricated swiftboat scandal until after the election), he could have beaten W and maybe we wouldn't have had the great recession.
Sometimes, the media's fabrications are very potent because they're so subtle: In the 60's, some radio and TV outlets upped the treble when leftists spoke so they would appear immature or nervous.
5
This comments which permeate most of the responses to this and other columns regarding Ms Clinton's ability to lead our nation appear to come from the minds of some who are unable, unwilling or both to accept the possibility a woman may become the actual Commander in Chief of the most powerful military nation on earth.
To consider for even a moment that Donald Trump is more qualified than Hillary Clinton to lead anything, but a parade of bathing beauties on the Atlantic City boardwalk indicates male delusion of the first order.
To many it appears any change diminishing the heroic role of men in a culture built on and maintained by force, which is even considered let alone threatened is intolerable. Picture if you will that change is initiated by a woman with a wrinckled brow who is no longer in shape to fill a proper bikini, then shift yoiur gaze to the man who clearly shares a similar problem with regard to both brow and bathing attire.
The world is changing and we are part of that world. Our youth responded to Obama's and Sanders' messages and after showing Ms Clinton the wisdom of those thoughts ushered a change she appears to have been waiting to welcome.
Putting snide aside, we as a nation, as a people and as a world need at this very critical time in our history to stop the constant expense of war and as long as men are in charge the likelihood of accomplishing that is unlikely.
Hillary Rodham, the woman, is our last best hope.
Mr Trump, the man, is not.
To consider for even a moment that Donald Trump is more qualified than Hillary Clinton to lead anything, but a parade of bathing beauties on the Atlantic City boardwalk indicates male delusion of the first order.
To many it appears any change diminishing the heroic role of men in a culture built on and maintained by force, which is even considered let alone threatened is intolerable. Picture if you will that change is initiated by a woman with a wrinckled brow who is no longer in shape to fill a proper bikini, then shift yoiur gaze to the man who clearly shares a similar problem with regard to both brow and bathing attire.
The world is changing and we are part of that world. Our youth responded to Obama's and Sanders' messages and after showing Ms Clinton the wisdom of those thoughts ushered a change she appears to have been waiting to welcome.
Putting snide aside, we as a nation, as a people and as a world need at this very critical time in our history to stop the constant expense of war and as long as men are in charge the likelihood of accomplishing that is unlikely.
Hillary Rodham, the woman, is our last best hope.
Mr Trump, the man, is not.
5
To this excellent editorial I suggest adding another very important function of the media; educate the public on propaganda versus news and information. For far too long journalism has suffered under the constant criticism they are too liberal. The 30 year assault on the news has resulted in Faux news and the lack of courage of objective journalist organizations to call out false equivalencies and downright falsehoods. The public inshort needs a good course in distinguishing propaganda from news from editorial comment.
Secondly the public needs a good lesson in civics to distinguish the difference between public and private functions of society. Sadly after this election the discussion will be postponed again.
The cult of the single bottom line continues to drive the propaganda.
Secondly the public needs a good lesson in civics to distinguish the difference between public and private functions of society. Sadly after this election the discussion will be postponed again.
The cult of the single bottom line continues to drive the propaganda.
2
It's not Trump's lies that bother me, I see through them immediately. It's his lightly aired 'incriminations', such as
'perhaps she went to sleep", his blotting out all talk of his secret tax-returns and freely pivoting (at no cost) to the e-mail server, of taking the credit for anything that has gone well and throwing blame the other way for policies he decries, and for getting away with insults to persons living and dead. What is gained by refuting a number like 42% unemployment among blacks to "only" 24%.
Fact-checking is not enough; the moderator has to keep on him to answer the questions and never stop until he does or gives up his bluster.
If Mr. Holt does not give up, he'll have a great debate. If he gives up, he's toast. And if he walks off the stage when Trump insults him, he's got guts.
Trump and Kenny Rogers know when to fold and walk.
Hopefully Mr. Holt will heed their advice.
'perhaps she went to sleep", his blotting out all talk of his secret tax-returns and freely pivoting (at no cost) to the e-mail server, of taking the credit for anything that has gone well and throwing blame the other way for policies he decries, and for getting away with insults to persons living and dead. What is gained by refuting a number like 42% unemployment among blacks to "only" 24%.
Fact-checking is not enough; the moderator has to keep on him to answer the questions and never stop until he does or gives up his bluster.
If Mr. Holt does not give up, he'll have a great debate. If he gives up, he's toast. And if he walks off the stage when Trump insults him, he's got guts.
Trump and Kenny Rogers know when to fold and walk.
Hopefully Mr. Holt will heed their advice.
3
At the point that either candidate fails to answer the question, or deviates from what is asked or offers falsehoods, their mike should be cut off and their time forfeited.
I am going home to Canada in 4 weeks. I am returning to a country that I care for and pray for and am so pleased to be next door to a great country, the USA. I see now that country going through a very difficult period. It is not the first time, nor the last. And in each such similar situation, the truth is clouded by the words that are written and how they are interpreted.
Your article Nicholas, is a great example of what we “foreigners” admire so much in “Americans”. The willingness to examine yourselves publicly and work on taking new positions that better reflect the moral playing field. A lot is asked of America and it is easy to forget that America is still a place where a black kid can become president, and the rights of women, minorities and others are forever being fought for.
I hope you will always challenge yourselves. I hope the 2 candidates for Presidency will rise up and provide the facts that people need to know so that they can be looked upon more favourably by the public when the enter to voting booths.
I hope for all of us, as we need great leadership at this time, and it helps when our neighbour to the South sends a message of hope and opportunity for a future for all of the planet.
Your article Nicholas, is a great example of what we “foreigners” admire so much in “Americans”. The willingness to examine yourselves publicly and work on taking new positions that better reflect the moral playing field. A lot is asked of America and it is easy to forget that America is still a place where a black kid can become president, and the rights of women, minorities and others are forever being fought for.
I hope you will always challenge yourselves. I hope the 2 candidates for Presidency will rise up and provide the facts that people need to know so that they can be looked upon more favourably by the public when the enter to voting booths.
I hope for all of us, as we need great leadership at this time, and it helps when our neighbour to the South sends a message of hope and opportunity for a future for all of the planet.
2
Mr. Kristof - You are not a "journalist" and should stop pretending to be one. While you, as a columnist, are free to express your opinions and views, that is not the job of the traditional reporter, who's responsibility it is to report the facts from all sides, as objectively as possible, and leave it to the reader to decide what the "facts" are. Contrary to what you believe, you do a dis-service to both yourself and your profession by advocating that "traditional evenhandedness" doesn't serve "the public interest". What public interest, and who decides what that interest is? You? What gives you that right? With your arrogance and obvious political bias, you are the poster boy of the progressive media. You claim, in all your self-righteousness, to be the vangard of democracy, but, in reality, everything you proclaim to be necessary to save the American people from themselves would in fact undermine the very democracy you profess to hold so dear. And you wonder why no one trusts the media. It's precisely because of rubbish like this.
2
The media simply does not understand its role. It's not grading the presentations of the candidates. It is not telling me which answers are the better ones,. The notion that it should determine who is the correct candidate borders on megalomania. Why should I be guided by a reporter who has no political experience that is meaningful to me, and certainly doesn't speak for me. I do not await the judgment that it is issued by a reporter from on high. They're no more qualified to pass judgment than I am. I will listen to the candidates and I will rely on my own judgment, in which I have great confidence, to decide who to vote for. The reporter can voter for whoever he wants. Frankly, I could care less.
There are no "reporters" anymore. Journalism is dead on gone. Only propagandists from both sides remain.
Nicholas Kristof,
You are right, but maybe too late. Trump with his very good brain has managed to captivate a large segment of the American public - who after Clinton's truly stupid "deplorable" comments - are motivated more than ever to vote Trump into the presidency. Call Trump whatever you wish. Denigrate him at will, but he clearly has the momentum.
Besides, you should know that the vast majority of people who support Trump (especially the "low educated") and those undecided who are leaning towards Trump do not read the New York Times or any other such newspapers, magazines, journals, etc. Even the National Review has been hopelessly ineffective in stopping Trump.
Clinton can regain the momentum and probably win the election by doing 2 things: (1) announce without prior consultation with her husband or daughter that she, her husband and daughter will no longer have any connection whatsoever with that foundation. And if those two object she will take up the matter with them in private. (2) Pledge that if elected she will dedicate herself to the welfare of all Americans, especially the Trump deplorables and others who hate her; that she will put the interests of the entire American public above the interest of her family, and that if her family objects, they can take that matter up with her in private.
If she doesn't take these actions immediately I give her at best a 50/50 chance of winning the election.
You are right, but maybe too late. Trump with his very good brain has managed to captivate a large segment of the American public - who after Clinton's truly stupid "deplorable" comments - are motivated more than ever to vote Trump into the presidency. Call Trump whatever you wish. Denigrate him at will, but he clearly has the momentum.
Besides, you should know that the vast majority of people who support Trump (especially the "low educated") and those undecided who are leaning towards Trump do not read the New York Times or any other such newspapers, magazines, journals, etc. Even the National Review has been hopelessly ineffective in stopping Trump.
Clinton can regain the momentum and probably win the election by doing 2 things: (1) announce without prior consultation with her husband or daughter that she, her husband and daughter will no longer have any connection whatsoever with that foundation. And if those two object she will take up the matter with them in private. (2) Pledge that if elected she will dedicate herself to the welfare of all Americans, especially the Trump deplorables and others who hate her; that she will put the interests of the entire American public above the interest of her family, and that if her family objects, they can take that matter up with her in private.
If she doesn't take these actions immediately I give her at best a 50/50 chance of winning the election.
1
The press has performed a terrible disservice to America by not documenting Don the Con's lies. I commend the NY Times in their Saturday edition of labeling all of Trump's lies this past week. I realize it is a tough task when virtually every word uttered by Don the Con is a whopper, but please do your job because the future of this nation may depend on it!
6
People vote for Trump because they hope that he feels some of their indignation (Clinton surely does not feel that, being part of the political elite) and because they hope that he can be their voice (even it is an angry irrational one who says one thing and then does another). Trump will not be a good president, he won't be a disaster, but he will be superficial, intellectually passive and running things in informal autocratic ways (like presidents in countries without democracy). Clinton would make a fine president, very dedicated, earnest and hard-working. But, in order to achieve Clinton holds back her own personal self (got to be strong), this is why people hesitate putting their trust in her.
4
So then readers should believe what Nick Kristof says because after all he represents the truth. Really? He is an unrepentant left wing supporter of Clinton who regularly injects his bias into everything he writes. So now Clinton and her supporters in the left wing media having exhausted the "Trump is a racist" meme are now pushing the "Trump is a liar" meme. Nothing Trump has ever said comes close to Clinton raising her right hand and swearing to tell truth to Congress and then saying "I never sent or received classified email on my server" or even better "I turned over all my work related email to the State Department." That's perjury and if she wasn't being shielded by Obama's "Justice" Department, there would be charges against her for that.
"Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling. As we move to the debates, let’s remember that to expose charlatans is not partisanship, but simply good journalism."
This is exactly what journalists of whatever stripe must do.
This is exactly what journalists of whatever stripe must do.
5
"We in the media ... didn't adequately signal ... that we would be welcomed in Iraq not with flowers but bombs"? You mean, your colleagues, considering you were opposed to the Iraq War? Not everyone who supported the war believed that Iraqis would greet us as a liberation force. How we would be seen by the citizens was not the preeminent factor in the decision to invade; rightly so.
The rationale for invasion was beefier than hindsight has made it appear. http://www.cfr.org/iraq/threatening-storm/p4876
Christopher Hitchens, who commenters like Socrates and gemli greatly admire (for his atheism, mostly, but perhaps for his democratic socialism [sic] as well), believed to his dying day that the decision to remove Saddam Hussein would, in time, be seen as one of the astutest decisions a commander-in-chief had ever made. How's that estimation looking? ...
Covering Trump is as difficult as assessing his expanding support group.
They are not deplorables, David Brooks tells us, but they assist a deplorable candidate. And what is the difference exactly? Remember the Stone Phillips interview with Jeffrey Dahmer where Dahmer turned to his old man and said, "Dad, I want you to know I'm real sorry about this"? Redemption! Should we also say that Dahmer was not a deplorable? 'Oops! I voted for Trump; I didn't know any better.' The difficulty in refereeing Trump is that the rabble mistrust referees and can't themselves distinguish fact from fiction. Predicament.
The rationale for invasion was beefier than hindsight has made it appear. http://www.cfr.org/iraq/threatening-storm/p4876
Christopher Hitchens, who commenters like Socrates and gemli greatly admire (for his atheism, mostly, but perhaps for his democratic socialism [sic] as well), believed to his dying day that the decision to remove Saddam Hussein would, in time, be seen as one of the astutest decisions a commander-in-chief had ever made. How's that estimation looking? ...
Covering Trump is as difficult as assessing his expanding support group.
They are not deplorables, David Brooks tells us, but they assist a deplorable candidate. And what is the difference exactly? Remember the Stone Phillips interview with Jeffrey Dahmer where Dahmer turned to his old man and said, "Dad, I want you to know I'm real sorry about this"? Redemption! Should we also say that Dahmer was not a deplorable? 'Oops! I voted for Trump; I didn't know any better.' The difficulty in refereeing Trump is that the rabble mistrust referees and can't themselves distinguish fact from fiction. Predicament.
3
It's a small point, but you're not really giving President Obama his just treatment, by simply citing the quotation about "acts of terror" as if he was speaking about Benghazi as terrorism. This is what he also said: "And make no mistake, we will work with the Libyan government to bring to justice the killers who attacked our people.
Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts."
Why is he talking about those who "denigrate the religious beliefs of others"? Because he's talking about that stupid video as being the cause, not the fact that it's...I don't know...SEPTEMBER 11th.
Since our founding, the United States has been a nation that respects all faiths. We reject all efforts to denigrate the religious beliefs of others. But there is absolutely no justification to this type of senseless violence. None. The world must stand together to unequivocally reject these brutal acts."
Why is he talking about those who "denigrate the religious beliefs of others"? Because he's talking about that stupid video as being the cause, not the fact that it's...I don't know...SEPTEMBER 11th.
1
It may be too late to convince us that journalism is honest. Fox News, and a subservient White House Press Corps and others have taught us otherwise. And with whistle-blowers being thrown in jail I can understand the fear that every writer faces as he decides what to print. As well as the decisions from hire up beholden to advertisers. We also have learned that when our government chooses to be silent in the interest of National Security it's usually because they are up to no good. The horse left the barn on American trust long ago. And that horse just isn't going to ride back to it.
Many of the comments below illustrate the problem - assertions that "She does it too," in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary. Fox News has done the GOP's dirty work, and done it well, when even people who don't watch it have gotten the message.
5
Yes, it will take a higher order of coverage to break Trump's spell. But with all due respect, if calling Trump out on his lies were enough, he never would have made it this far.
The flaw in relying on "liar, liar" coverage is its underlying assumption that the paramount importance of a Presidential candidate's ethics is as obvious to the electorate as it is to the rest of us.
This assumption has already been disproved: Trump's supporters know Trump's ubiquitous lies are whoppers, and still, they applaud him for his sheer chutzpah. What's more, they know the rest of us are apoplectic with righteous indignation and find us laughable. Goody-goodies just don't play well in America -- it's not much better when the media tries to act like some sort of quasi-scientific "truth-o-meter," pretending on one page to be objective, and writing op-eds on the other.
Trump's succeeded this far by keeping us all scrambling to digest his sly unpredictability from moment-to-moment; he knows the one thing his hokum can't withstand is a serious look at the future.
A better approach would be portraying consequences: imagining a government where no one in either party can trust the President's word, investigating the cost of ignoring climate change, or predicting the negative effects of a downgrade in America's international status as a trustworthy ally.
The media is in a unique position to direct our gaze. It's time to dig a little deeper and come up with something really useful.
The flaw in relying on "liar, liar" coverage is its underlying assumption that the paramount importance of a Presidential candidate's ethics is as obvious to the electorate as it is to the rest of us.
This assumption has already been disproved: Trump's supporters know Trump's ubiquitous lies are whoppers, and still, they applaud him for his sheer chutzpah. What's more, they know the rest of us are apoplectic with righteous indignation and find us laughable. Goody-goodies just don't play well in America -- it's not much better when the media tries to act like some sort of quasi-scientific "truth-o-meter," pretending on one page to be objective, and writing op-eds on the other.
Trump's succeeded this far by keeping us all scrambling to digest his sly unpredictability from moment-to-moment; he knows the one thing his hokum can't withstand is a serious look at the future.
A better approach would be portraying consequences: imagining a government where no one in either party can trust the President's word, investigating the cost of ignoring climate change, or predicting the negative effects of a downgrade in America's international status as a trustworthy ally.
The media is in a unique position to direct our gaze. It's time to dig a little deeper and come up with something really useful.
12
A call to conscience, so late in the game.
Elsewhere in this publication, an extensive article about Clinton ties to Goldman Sachs, a gift if ever there was one to the Trump campaign. I don't get it. Wake up! Armageddon is coming to America, say something positive about the person, Hillary, who stands between this dear country, and chaos.
,
Elsewhere in this publication, an extensive article about Clinton ties to Goldman Sachs, a gift if ever there was one to the Trump campaign. I don't get it. Wake up! Armageddon is coming to America, say something positive about the person, Hillary, who stands between this dear country, and chaos.
,
18
It may or may not be an issue of the number of lies. I don't know, but what I do know is that there is a major difference in how lies are employed. At worst, Clinton's lies are artless, sometimes careless attempts at defending herself on issues that aren't that big a deal. It happens when she is cornered. Trump's lies are quite different. They are premeditated. They are offensive. They are vicious. They are calculated to do harm. It is the difference between offense and defense. They permeate his life as an essential part of his modus operandi. The best example of Trump's type of lie was the whole birtherism thing. That was a lie that was a premeditated fabrication whose sole purpose was to harm another person. Clinton has never done anything even close to that. (It's not totally unique to Trump; it is a characteristic of the alt right.) However, as to Trump, himself, it is a pathological character flaw. I don't know how the news media can adequately help by just fact checking. They might say "What you just said is false and here is the evidence." They might even say "You just lied." But they aren't going to say "That is a vicious, premeditated slur."
22
If person A states the Earth is flat and person B states it is round, the press has the duty to call out the clearly misinformed person and present the truth in the form of evidence - a photo from space, etc. They can go further and improve on the truth by also clarifying that the Earth is in the shape of an Oblate Spheroid and not quite a sphere - links to the proof are available online from reputable scientific sources.
Good journalism doesn't just report what A and B say and leave the conclusion for the reader to figure out. Good journalism uncovers and reports the facts as best they can from evidence, science and even common sense (while saying so) and comparing it with what A and B said.
Now the reader can better evaluate person A and B statements.
Unfortunately, in this politically divisive season, the following is true:
If Trump states the Earth is flat, he is being sarcastic.
If Hillary states the Earth is round, the GOP calls her a liar and should be locked up - the Earth is an Oblate Spheroid after all.
Good journalism doesn't just report what A and B say and leave the conclusion for the reader to figure out. Good journalism uncovers and reports the facts as best they can from evidence, science and even common sense (while saying so) and comparing it with what A and B said.
Now the reader can better evaluate person A and B statements.
Unfortunately, in this politically divisive season, the following is true:
If Trump states the Earth is flat, he is being sarcastic.
If Hillary states the Earth is round, the GOP calls her a liar and should be locked up - the Earth is an Oblate Spheroid after all.
7
Boo. My thoughts? You're not interested - or for whatever reason - do not consider my thoughts publishable - when you publish all the other stuff, not all of it to say... eloquent, poignant, remarkable, incisive..... What's the deal? Who makes your choices in the end? Google? Yours truly, ripe, not sour grapes.
2
The way to cover this despicable Trump fellow is to simply quote all his hundreds of crazy despicable statements he has made.
2
"If a known con artist peddles a potion that he claims will make people lose 25 pounds and enjoy a better sex life, we don’t just quote the man and a critic; we find ways to signal to readers that he’s a fraud. Why should it be different when the con man runs for president?"
That quote gets at the crux of the Trump problem for me. The problem is, all advertising claims have one degree or another of fiction present as part of the message.
Examples: while browsing the internet I run across ads for pills that will make me as smart as Stephen Hawking or devices that will add two inches to my 'you know what'. These are bald faced lies. Other ads on TV do not say but suggest strongly that I will be as cool and sexy as Mathew McConahey if I drive a certain brand of car. This is a more subtle lie. But, it is a lie none the less. If we specifically fact check the claim that he has always driven that brand of car, I would bet that specific claim is false.
Why does lying occur in advertising? Because it works. I would argue also that it has always been a part of political campaigning. Trump is simply a candidate who uses advertising and media more effectively than we normally see.
The question is, what counter strategy works against a candidate who uses the techniques we are talking about here.
I suspect that 'fact checking', while necessary, may have only limited effectiveness, because, empirically, advertising works, and that means facts don't matter so much.
That quote gets at the crux of the Trump problem for me. The problem is, all advertising claims have one degree or another of fiction present as part of the message.
Examples: while browsing the internet I run across ads for pills that will make me as smart as Stephen Hawking or devices that will add two inches to my 'you know what'. These are bald faced lies. Other ads on TV do not say but suggest strongly that I will be as cool and sexy as Mathew McConahey if I drive a certain brand of car. This is a more subtle lie. But, it is a lie none the less. If we specifically fact check the claim that he has always driven that brand of car, I would bet that specific claim is false.
Why does lying occur in advertising? Because it works. I would argue also that it has always been a part of political campaigning. Trump is simply a candidate who uses advertising and media more effectively than we normally see.
The question is, what counter strategy works against a candidate who uses the techniques we are talking about here.
I suspect that 'fact checking', while necessary, may have only limited effectiveness, because, empirically, advertising works, and that means facts don't matter so much.
3
It's not only for the journalists but also for all but the most extreme. Time to choose. We will not forget nor forgive your choice. There is no legitimate reason to vote for Trump. Not one.
4
Read the article in today's Times 'A Week of Whoppers by Donald Trump.' If there were more articles like that, carried in more papers it might help. I've always felt Trump has a shakey grasp on reality, but after reading that I felt he was downright delusional.
If not the media to expose this, then who?
If not the media to expose this, then who?
3
The debate moderators need to follow up on untruthful statements. Otherwise, why have "journalists" moderating the debates? Just have some robots read out predetermined questions. No need for expertise, if no expertise will be employed.
5
I can't tell you how happy I am that the 4th estate finally realizes how profoundly they have let the American public down. I just hope it is not too late.
5
Thank you for using the word "demagogue" in talking about Donald Trump. No coverage of him is complete without this characterization, for that is what he is by any objective standard. Even people who love him, if they are intellectually honest, cannot deny that he is a demagogue.
3
For most of the primary season and this campaign, journalists nodded at every word Trump said. Human microphones. God forbid they would ever say, "Mr. Trump, those are not the facts." IF that wasn't enough, his tweets were flashed across the screen as a topic of conversation. He called into morning shows - again - nodding journalists. Cable news interrupted their own programming to televise his rallies live.
Now they're signaling that they are ready to continue grading on a curve. The expectations for Trump are so low that if he doesn't soil himself on Monday, he wins! I will not be watching the debate because I refuse to watch more softball questions and the tolerance for the lies. I also can't listen to email questions either.
Now they're signaling that they are ready to continue grading on a curve. The expectations for Trump are so low that if he doesn't soil himself on Monday, he wins! I will not be watching the debate because I refuse to watch more softball questions and the tolerance for the lies. I also can't listen to email questions either.
2
If Trump wins, we're all in a heap of trouble.
5
Your next article should be how to cover a phony like Clinton. Just wait until she gets to be president. You will see what a charlatan she is. I am not Trump supporter, and would not vote for either of these clowns, but let's be fair. There isn't much good to say about Hillary. But, like I say, just wait. In one year there will be tons of articles and editorials blasting Hillary. If I didn't care so much about this country, I would find it very amusing.
1
A phony. Provide some examples.
1
I do think that walking, lying reality tv show that is Donald Trump drives ratings which feeds the national media beast. Fox is the most extreme (and absurd) example. Rupert Murdoch, paragon of greed, had the brilliant idea of selling media by exploiting women. Should we really expect this clown to offer "fair and balanced" coverage of his fellow billionaire, Donald?
I am not surprised that people have so little confidence in the press. Much of the media hide behind objectivity. Let readers decide? 3/4's of republicans think Obama was born in Kenya. If any thing, the news media has gotten that story right but it still doesn't matter.
This is the brilliance of Trump. He knows how vulnerable the system is. He can say whatever he wants and will never be held accountable. Media ethics has no answer for a shameless liar like Trump. The damage has been done. Still the media could turn the tables and state the obvious: the man is an incorrigible, egomaniacal, pathological liar. He should be held immediately accountable and his lies should not be aired. Media coverage should be a privilege. I am not talking about exaggerations, mistakes or half-truths. All part of politics. Baldfaced lies that require no fact checking beyond a google search? Doesn't get repeated or aired. There must be a downside to lying. People must no it costs them something. Most people care about their reputation. Trump doesn't but he should.
I am not surprised that people have so little confidence in the press. Much of the media hide behind objectivity. Let readers decide? 3/4's of republicans think Obama was born in Kenya. If any thing, the news media has gotten that story right but it still doesn't matter.
This is the brilliance of Trump. He knows how vulnerable the system is. He can say whatever he wants and will never be held accountable. Media ethics has no answer for a shameless liar like Trump. The damage has been done. Still the media could turn the tables and state the obvious: the man is an incorrigible, egomaniacal, pathological liar. He should be held immediately accountable and his lies should not be aired. Media coverage should be a privilege. I am not talking about exaggerations, mistakes or half-truths. All part of politics. Baldfaced lies that require no fact checking beyond a google search? Doesn't get repeated or aired. There must be a downside to lying. People must no it costs them something. Most people care about their reputation. Trump doesn't but he should.
4
You don't need to go back to 2008 to uncover lies from Hillary Clinton - she was just at it a couple of weeks ago about her 'allergies'.
Anyway who cares about either lying candidate - why don't you try your new get-tough approach on the worst serial liars in America, the generals and 'unnamed sources in the intelligence community' whose lies you blandly recycle week in and week out to justify American militarism in the Middle East?
You don't seem to have any issues with their 'duplicity', and haven't for decades. If you had there wouldn't have been a war in Iraq. But that wasn't your finest hour, was it Nick?
Anyway who cares about either lying candidate - why don't you try your new get-tough approach on the worst serial liars in America, the generals and 'unnamed sources in the intelligence community' whose lies you blandly recycle week in and week out to justify American militarism in the Middle East?
You don't seem to have any issues with their 'duplicity', and haven't for decades. If you had there wouldn't have been a war in Iraq. But that wasn't your finest hour, was it Nick?
1
Mr Trump is a hateful dangerous man. We should be hitting the street demonstrating against Mr Trump. This is a time to stand up to this bully. We must vote.
6
Who wants to tell Kristof that most of us don't consider opinion columnists 'journalists'? Hard to take his idea of journalism seriously when he calls Trump a 'duplicitous demagogue' while at the same time referring to Clinton's 'email evasiveness' instead of calling it what it is, lying?
1
The media launders Trump's lies like criminal enterprises launder dirty money - when neither should see the light of day.
4
It is long overdue and refreshing to hear Mr. Kristof state the essential role of journalism, which is really to embody applied social science. Like any human science, the ultimate goal of social science is to discover and explain the truth about our human world, whether it is our biology, our psychology, or how we can most effectively live together on this planet (and beyond).
Journalism at its best is the spear point of society's efforts to parse and explain almost anything that humanity is doing, and to help us to understand what, how, and why. To ignore essential tools for identifying the truth in all of it is without a doubt, journalistic ignorance at best and malpractice at worst.
Mr. Kristof is really calling the entire journalistic profession to account where it ignores or disgards the truth in the name of "fair and balanced" or "evenhanded" coverage. The political sphere this election cycle is a perfect case in point. Journalistic coverage of the Clinton/Trump campaigns has allowed a con man (Trump) to convince a large minority (hopefully) of voting Americans that an unrepentant liar is more trustworthy than his opponent who occasionally waxes careless with the truth, but whose head and heart is forever working to find the best way forward for all Americans.
It is fine to vote for whoever you believe to be the best candidate, but it should not have to be left to history to determine where truth might have made a difference in a future desperately left without it.
Journalism at its best is the spear point of society's efforts to parse and explain almost anything that humanity is doing, and to help us to understand what, how, and why. To ignore essential tools for identifying the truth in all of it is without a doubt, journalistic ignorance at best and malpractice at worst.
Mr. Kristof is really calling the entire journalistic profession to account where it ignores or disgards the truth in the name of "fair and balanced" or "evenhanded" coverage. The political sphere this election cycle is a perfect case in point. Journalistic coverage of the Clinton/Trump campaigns has allowed a con man (Trump) to convince a large minority (hopefully) of voting Americans that an unrepentant liar is more trustworthy than his opponent who occasionally waxes careless with the truth, but whose head and heart is forever working to find the best way forward for all Americans.
It is fine to vote for whoever you believe to be the best candidate, but it should not have to be left to history to determine where truth might have made a difference in a future desperately left without it.
3
How did that saying about civic duty and eternal vigilance go again? It seems especially appropriate in 2016. Those well-know and immortal words usually attributed to Edmund Burke, that is.
Isn't it something like: “the only thing necessary for the triumph of extreme wackadoodleness is for good men and women to pretend that pernicious, idiotic, tedious blather is something other than pernicious, idiotic, tedious blather”? (hashtag: birther-er together)
Isn't it something like: “the only thing necessary for the triumph of extreme wackadoodleness is for good men and women to pretend that pernicious, idiotic, tedious blather is something other than pernicious, idiotic, tedious blather”? (hashtag: birther-er together)
4
Oh bravo. Thank you Mr. Kristof!
It's shocking that we can see ten lies from Trump in real time, crazy stuff that belongs in an alternate universe, or even worse a terrible, dark vision of America that doesn't resemble in the slightest the world - bustling, vibrant, living, creative - outside my door.
Trump practically begs for violence, all but threatens Hillary Clinton, the press, the Constitution, judges. He insinuates "Second Amendment solutions," his son tweets outright white supremacist memes; Trump himself tries to pawn off a Star of David on a field of money as "a Sheriff's star" and declares Mexicans rapists, more or less stereotypes Muslims as terrorists, vows to build walls and form a deportation squad - this is rhetoric straight from the 1930's.
Fact: the right has been busily smearing the Clintons, both of them, for decades. The Benghazi committee was by the admission of the House majority leader a political witch hunt designed to drag Hillary into the mud.
Guess what. It worked!
It's high time we saw some truth felling. It's all but too late I fear.
It's shocking that we can see ten lies from Trump in real time, crazy stuff that belongs in an alternate universe, or even worse a terrible, dark vision of America that doesn't resemble in the slightest the world - bustling, vibrant, living, creative - outside my door.
Trump practically begs for violence, all but threatens Hillary Clinton, the press, the Constitution, judges. He insinuates "Second Amendment solutions," his son tweets outright white supremacist memes; Trump himself tries to pawn off a Star of David on a field of money as "a Sheriff's star" and declares Mexicans rapists, more or less stereotypes Muslims as terrorists, vows to build walls and form a deportation squad - this is rhetoric straight from the 1930's.
Fact: the right has been busily smearing the Clintons, both of them, for decades. The Benghazi committee was by the admission of the House majority leader a political witch hunt designed to drag Hillary into the mud.
Guess what. It worked!
It's high time we saw some truth felling. It's all but too late I fear.
3
I once conducted a phone interview with Donald Trump in the 1990s. As a very young reporter at a mid-sized outlet he was one of the most prominent people I ever interviewed. He returned my call because I was interested in reporting on a new and expensive Trump venture.
His assistant said, "Please hold for Mr. Trump". When Trump got on the phone he called me by first name, told me he was in ___ (resort area; it was the winter holidays) and asked how my holiday was going. This was the first time I had ever spoken to Donald Trump. While charming, everything he told me about the venture was a complete fabrication; I noted this when I did an automatic fact-check while reporting the story. I used his (exaggerated) quotes contrasted with people he mentioned who all said when I contacted them - every one of them - everything he had told me was not accurate. I never heard from Trump after the story hit though I received many positive comments about it.
What I think has been the problem until very recently is that journalists were not willing to call a lie a lie. They were worried about being 'fair and balanced' - a joke when it comes to Trump - and worried that the mercurial Trump would cut their access - which I believe he tried with some outlets recently, such as the Washington Post. Yet a Trump without media is a plant without water and air so he quickly reversed course. I'm glad to see the New York Times - albeit belatedly - is no longer ashamed to fact-check Trump.
His assistant said, "Please hold for Mr. Trump". When Trump got on the phone he called me by first name, told me he was in ___ (resort area; it was the winter holidays) and asked how my holiday was going. This was the first time I had ever spoken to Donald Trump. While charming, everything he told me about the venture was a complete fabrication; I noted this when I did an automatic fact-check while reporting the story. I used his (exaggerated) quotes contrasted with people he mentioned who all said when I contacted them - every one of them - everything he had told me was not accurate. I never heard from Trump after the story hit though I received many positive comments about it.
What I think has been the problem until very recently is that journalists were not willing to call a lie a lie. They were worried about being 'fair and balanced' - a joke when it comes to Trump - and worried that the mercurial Trump would cut their access - which I believe he tried with some outlets recently, such as the Washington Post. Yet a Trump without media is a plant without water and air so he quickly reversed course. I'm glad to see the New York Times - albeit belatedly - is no longer ashamed to fact-check Trump.
18
We are in desperate need of the little boy to say the proposed emperor has no clothes.
4
In declaring (two centuries ago) that journalism is history written under pressure, the historian Macauley undoubtedly meant the pressure of time. Modern journalists labor under the pressures not only to expedite, but also to entertain. Trump's style - which uniquely pervades his character and personal history - is the perfect trap for that medium. He capitalizes, vote by vote, on our preoccupation with sound bites and irony.
So what can be expected of the debate moderators? A televised debate lies exactly at the intersection of entertainment and substance. 100 million potential voters will tune in not necessarily, or largely, to be informed of the candidates' positions but as much, or more, to witness the clash of their personalities and wits. Still, the ostensible purpose is to illuminate substantive positions. The moderator's challenge then is to shed light on (but not define) the line between fact and fiction. Some might call that enforcing fair play, but the indispensable value for a democratic process this significant is meaning - really, understanding. If the moderator shines that light, then the contenders remain advocates for themselves - this is and, like the courts, should be an adversarial process - and for their values. Partiality, and the appearance of it, can be avoided if the journalist facilitates questions about accuracy without declaring the truth.
I think that is the core of Mr. Kristoff's piece, and of his profession.
So what can be expected of the debate moderators? A televised debate lies exactly at the intersection of entertainment and substance. 100 million potential voters will tune in not necessarily, or largely, to be informed of the candidates' positions but as much, or more, to witness the clash of their personalities and wits. Still, the ostensible purpose is to illuminate substantive positions. The moderator's challenge then is to shed light on (but not define) the line between fact and fiction. Some might call that enforcing fair play, but the indispensable value for a democratic process this significant is meaning - really, understanding. If the moderator shines that light, then the contenders remain advocates for themselves - this is and, like the courts, should be an adversarial process - and for their values. Partiality, and the appearance of it, can be avoided if the journalist facilitates questions about accuracy without declaring the truth.
I think that is the core of Mr. Kristoff's piece, and of his profession.
3
There may be a requirement for objectivity in the sciences, but there is none in life.
1
I think that sometimes and especially with someone as unethical and unqualified as Trump, journalists should say and do whatever it takes to expose this demagogue, even if it means violating journalistic boundaries. The safety and security of our country should be the first priority. Trump gets way with his lies because some in the media have prostituted themselves. Like Trump's campaign manager they are spinners of the truth. They can lie and get away with it like Trump. The press needs to start asking the hard questions and call him out for what he is. If not, then as a country we will lose our dignity, respect, and even our freedom.
3
Everybody needs to know what kind of person we are electing: is this person fit for the presidency? can this person be trusted to do what's best for our country? Merely recording the candidate's words doesn't help us as voters. In fact, that kind of uncritical reporting makes journalists a de facto arm of the candidate's propaganda machine. We need to know when a candidate is lying; we need to know a candidate's personality flaws relevant to the presidency. Reporters meet the candidates personally and spend time around them--a unique and valuable experience. Most of us never get closer to the candidates than a TV screen. So how about some common sense? Journalists live in this country too. If a bad person is elected president, they'll be eating it with the rest of us.
96
A lie is a lie is a lie. The media has danced around this for almost a year. We now know a lot about Donald Trump and one of the least of his many flaws is his ability to lie non-stop. For those educated, aware voters, his deceptions are pretty easy to spot. But there are less informed voters who may not believe that anyone would dare to tell the volume of fictional tales (lies) that flows so easily for this candidate.......the naive voter. For this voter we must call it like it is...a Big, Fat, Lie! The various diversions around this simple truth escape many, I am afraid. I am happy to note that over the past week, I have witnessed several commentators calling out Trump on his lies. I am hoping more will take up the banner as the election is upon us. When we hear untruths being spoken, call it out. Remember that Evil is perpetuated by good people standing by and saying nothing. And we just can't afford to turn this country over to a liar and so much worse.
1
I am somewhat surprised that there is a comments section to this latest of the endless "hit pieces" on Trump.
I have always admired Mr. Kristof's often courageous journalism on matters of real import, so I am deeply disappointed that he has bowed to pressure to produce a piece that has no resemblance to his former stature.
I have always admired Mr. Kristof's often courageous journalism on matters of real import, so I am deeply disappointed that he has bowed to pressure to produce a piece that has no resemblance to his former stature.
Oh that more journalists where more like Nicholas and readers more discerning. Vote in November.
1
For you and the entire New York Times, this is one whole year too late.
Now, how about focusing on the major issues and likely major effects of our choice, to aid prudent voting? -- instead of portraying the election as a horse-race for readers' armchair entertainment?
Those major issues would be:
1. Climate change.
2. Seizure of our economy and democracy by a money-insider royalty.
3. Dangers of war(s) and terrorism.
Now, how about focusing on the major issues and likely major effects of our choice, to aid prudent voting? -- instead of portraying the election as a horse-race for readers' armchair entertainment?
Those major issues would be:
1. Climate change.
2. Seizure of our economy and democracy by a money-insider royalty.
3. Dangers of war(s) and terrorism.
4
Right wing talk radio has been talking--and lying--like Trump for decades, and they are a major reason, probably the major reason, that Trump's wild lies and trash talk have attracted so many like-minded American fantasists. Some of them even hold elected office, like Rob Portman, the R senator from Ohio. If any of these folks are feeling mad because they get no respect, well, they should take a long, hard look in the mirror. People who support the dreck that Trump serves up you deserve no one's respect.
3
The media should have been doing this to Trump one year ago. Trump was lying and abusive during the entire primary campaign, and numerous republicans tried to point out his inaccuracies (i.e. lies) and insults. Why do you think #neverTrump exists?
Instead of joining those republicans, however,, the media enabled Trump to help win the republican primaries by giving him untold free coverage and not pointing out his lies. The media wanted Trump to be the republican nominee because they thought he would easily lose the general election.
Now, after months of enabling Trump, the media wants to change how he is covered because they are afraid he might defeat Hillary.
I despise Trump, but I also despise the press because they should have pointed out Trump's problems way before this point.
The take home lesson is the media has no standards, and they only care when their own agenda is threatened.
Instead of joining those republicans, however,, the media enabled Trump to help win the republican primaries by giving him untold free coverage and not pointing out his lies. The media wanted Trump to be the republican nominee because they thought he would easily lose the general election.
Now, after months of enabling Trump, the media wants to change how he is covered because they are afraid he might defeat Hillary.
I despise Trump, but I also despise the press because they should have pointed out Trump's problems way before this point.
The take home lesson is the media has no standards, and they only care when their own agenda is threatened.
3
Fair enough; now I'm waiting for "how do we cover a duplicitous self-dealer like HRC" but not holding my breath.
So, we should vote for the one who lies less?
I think you're on the wrong track here Mr. Kristof. The problem isn't the media, its the people, unfortunately a large portion of the U.S. voter population, who these days lack the education and intellect to know or care whether Trump tells the truth. They say Hillary is dishonest because they hate her and Trump is not because they like him. Hillary's fewer deceptions are somehow less excusable than Trump's. These people, who for most of their lives have been browbeaten into acquiescing to minority rights in areas such as housing opportunities feel liberated by a man who can deny these rights with no apology. The bedrock supporters of Trump have their own idea of 'hope and change'. We should never forget that the capacity to support the likes of Trump is deep within the human psyche, waiting for those who know how to unleash it.
2
This charlatan had free time 7 days a week/24h , all year around until this moment. Many news papers, specially the NY times, cable FOX,CNN,MSM you name it. Free media for all americans and the rest of the world to stomach Trump. Can you believe if Bernie had this opportunity? It's too late now. I am begging for all young people that voted for Bernie like me, to go out and vote for Hilary. Forget about ideology, because in this 2016 election we can not afford ideology. I am very progressive, but I would never waste my VOTE . Trump is a TSUNAMI, and the whole world do not want to see him in the White House, and we don't want either. The future belongs to you. I care about my daughter's future, and I care about your future too. I call that a health society. Hillary, million times than Trump. Many people don't like her, but forget that. Don't take so personal. She's intelligent, with plenty capacity to be our next president. She knows how to get things done. Actually there are few people capable to run this nation today. Nobody has more international connection than Hillary. She will do a good job. She was not my candidate, but I have to VOTE for her.' Remember LULA/ the president of Brasil . He was very popular to the uninformed citizens , he did 2 terms. and became the biggest thief in the history.His corrupt Labor Party is almost destroyed. Don't forget, a president does not need to be popular.
5
If only the cable news channels would heed your words, Mr. Kristof. It is they who have enabled the rise of Trump, for precisely the reasons you state: ratings. Morning Joe on MSNBC was the first, and it became obvious and disgusting. I question how many people, like myself, stopped watching Morning Joe for the very reason that Trump was everywhere.
Your responsibility as a print journalist is to be truthful. If you know a candidate is lying, is it not incumbent upon you to state the truth? This is not showing a preference for one side or the other, it is simply doing your job as it should be done. Now, good for you!
Your responsibility as a print journalist is to be truthful. If you know a candidate is lying, is it not incumbent upon you to state the truth? This is not showing a preference for one side or the other, it is simply doing your job as it should be done. Now, good for you!
3
Why isn't there a program on TV in the US that is equivalent to the BBC's "Hard Talk"? On that program, the host (and there have been several in recent years, all equally effective) is very well prepared, questions the interviewee on specific issues, will not tolerate lies and evasions, confronts the interviewee with facts that the host is in possession of, and in general will not let interviewees get away with much at all.
Another reader here remarked that TV journalists are afraid that if they press too hard, a person like Trump might simply walk out and they would "lose the interview." The antidote to that: Just make clear that if a candidate walks out, the remaining time in the program will be given over to playing the opposing candidate's ads, free of charge.
Another reader here remarked that TV journalists are afraid that if they press too hard, a person like Trump might simply walk out and they would "lose the interview." The antidote to that: Just make clear that if a candidate walks out, the remaining time in the program will be given over to playing the opposing candidate's ads, free of charge.
2
Mr. Kristof's point is well taken, and he rightly points out that the "Trump problem" has many precedents in journalistic cowardice. But it's important to note that the problem of false duality hardly begins and ends at Trump. Over and over again he is compared to that "real Republican" and "true conservative," Mike Pence. But the mainstream media has been deafeningly silent about Pence's own lunatic positions - as just one example, his shocking declaration, after being well paid by the tobacco industry, that "despite the hysteria from the political class and the media, smoking doesn’t kill.” At this point, Trump's buffoonery is well documented - when is the media going to get around to the vice presidential nominee??
4
The mainstream media does have a liberal bias and always has. However, with the advent of Fox, Breitbart, Drudge etc. mainstream media can and should get more aggressive. You need to be an effective counterweight to Limbaugh and company. You are too nice for your own good. Fox even has the audacity to have a "Bias Alert" when they call out CNN or other outlets for so-called bias when they are nothing more than the propaganda ministry of the GOP.
3
The most distressing thing about this election is not that Trump engages in unprecedented amount of lies and misinformation, it's that such a large percentage of our population lack the basic critical reasoning skills to realize this. They also seem to let their innate biases and fears to overcome their senses. I work in wall street and have realized recently that is why we are able to make the $$$ that we do!!
7
What arrogance to think that the American people are so stupid that the press needs to up its game in order to get the "correct" election outcome. I don't have your confidence that you and your comrades at the NYT, WaPo, and other establishment mouthpieces know the average citizen's interests better than they do. Everything you're saying sounds like a rationalization for using your position in the media to influence the election for your favorite candidate. I prefer my media to stick to reporting facts and let the campaign staffs be the cheerleading section.
1
Well if you want the media to report facts then they can't report anything Mr. Trump says as all of what he says is fact free.
1
Mr. Trump is a Projectile Liar. The flash-flood of lies he looses is spinning with broken tree limbs, garbage cans, cars, such assorted detritus that it is very hard to analyze in real time. All questions are deflected. This is his MO -- he's not going to change into some measured Presidential Person on Nov. 9th if he were to win.
TV persons just sit there and let Mr. Trump and his SpoxLiars shift instantly from the anchor's question about Mr. Trump to Hillary's supposed sins -- without even a whimper or a wince from the anchor. It's stunning to hear and see.
Among many excellent speeches, Sec. Clinton gives a riveting and trailblazing speech on mental health & disabilities and only the 12-second wry crack she makes about Mr. Trump makes the "news" while I have seen hours spent watching Mr. Trump's empty podium, awaiting the Arrival of the alt-white's Anointed.
Our national soul is darkly stained. Can we explain to our World Family how we let Mr. Trump odiously mock a disabled person and we did not, shuddering, shun him? Shame! Teacher friends say this mocking and other cruel poisons are infecting even unto pre-K.
Our sacred honor is at stake. This is a Malignant Menace lurching towards Washington. I will not wake up on November 9th with history forever asking, plaintively, aghast, 'Where were the Good Americans?" I will at least cry out for the humane, the sane.
TV persons just sit there and let Mr. Trump and his SpoxLiars shift instantly from the anchor's question about Mr. Trump to Hillary's supposed sins -- without even a whimper or a wince from the anchor. It's stunning to hear and see.
Among many excellent speeches, Sec. Clinton gives a riveting and trailblazing speech on mental health & disabilities and only the 12-second wry crack she makes about Mr. Trump makes the "news" while I have seen hours spent watching Mr. Trump's empty podium, awaiting the Arrival of the alt-white's Anointed.
Our national soul is darkly stained. Can we explain to our World Family how we let Mr. Trump odiously mock a disabled person and we did not, shuddering, shun him? Shame! Teacher friends say this mocking and other cruel poisons are infecting even unto pre-K.
Our sacred honor is at stake. This is a Malignant Menace lurching towards Washington. I will not wake up on November 9th with history forever asking, plaintively, aghast, 'Where were the Good Americans?" I will at least cry out for the humane, the sane.
10
"Our job is....truth-telling".
You write op-ed pieces Mr. Kristof. Your job is whatever you want it to be. Truth-telling, fine, remembering of course that in politics truth seems to be fluid and there are different versions of truth.
As for those whose journalism does not appear in Opinion or is not defined as "analysis" or "commentary", then sticking to the facts ("news") is the way to go on every issue.
You write op-ed pieces Mr. Kristof. Your job is whatever you want it to be. Truth-telling, fine, remembering of course that in politics truth seems to be fluid and there are different versions of truth.
As for those whose journalism does not appear in Opinion or is not defined as "analysis" or "commentary", then sticking to the facts ("news") is the way to go on every issue.
21
Trump's lies are the news.
Your response is of course simply your opinion and version of the apparently ever-elusive truth. So by your standards it's fine for me to note the inaccuracies I perceive to be inherent in your viewpoint and move on.
And the truth is:
1. Trump wasn't always against the Iraq war. It's unclear if he ever was, before it was obvious to all that it was a mistake.
2. He's not a great businessman. His companies filed bankruptcy six times, and he would be at least 3 times wealthier had he invested the $100sM daddy left him in an index fund.
3. He's not a philanthropist. He uses other people's money to pay his debts, buy toys for himself, line his pockets.
4. He has no interest in people's problems. He's never done anything for anyone other than himself and his family. He uses people to advance his interests, stiffing contractors, defrauding students, leaving investors holding the bag.
5. The lives of black people are not worse than ever. Crime is down significantly in most cities. There are pockets of crises in some (e.g., Chicago), but most are in better shape than ever.
6. He doesn't know more than the generals about Iraq, and suggesting so is an insult to all members of the military.
7. A degree from Penn doesn't confer intelligence. That requires work, research, an interest in learning, the ability to discern the difference between fact and fiction. He has no interest in intellectual pursuits. He has "people" who tell him "things".
8. Obama was born in the US, and Clinton didn't start that rumor. Trump, alone, is responsible for sparking the flame and fueling the fire.
9. He's been a racist at least since he tried to keep black people from renting apartments in daddy's projects.
1. Trump wasn't always against the Iraq war. It's unclear if he ever was, before it was obvious to all that it was a mistake.
2. He's not a great businessman. His companies filed bankruptcy six times, and he would be at least 3 times wealthier had he invested the $100sM daddy left him in an index fund.
3. He's not a philanthropist. He uses other people's money to pay his debts, buy toys for himself, line his pockets.
4. He has no interest in people's problems. He's never done anything for anyone other than himself and his family. He uses people to advance his interests, stiffing contractors, defrauding students, leaving investors holding the bag.
5. The lives of black people are not worse than ever. Crime is down significantly in most cities. There are pockets of crises in some (e.g., Chicago), but most are in better shape than ever.
6. He doesn't know more than the generals about Iraq, and suggesting so is an insult to all members of the military.
7. A degree from Penn doesn't confer intelligence. That requires work, research, an interest in learning, the ability to discern the difference between fact and fiction. He has no interest in intellectual pursuits. He has "people" who tell him "things".
8. Obama was born in the US, and Clinton didn't start that rumor. Trump, alone, is responsible for sparking the flame and fueling the fire.
9. He's been a racist at least since he tried to keep black people from renting apartments in daddy's projects.
4
Many if not most of Trump's supporters do not think he is a Charlatan, although he clearly is. After all, he's a billionaire and hasn't been arrested for fraud yet, and therefore must be a successful businessman. They don't care otherwise.
4
I think that the press was so enamored with the idea of Trump flummoxing the GOP that they let him skate by the early primary contests. Now, he is in a position of damaging the whole country, it is too late for the truth to affect a Hugh portion of the electorate.
4
After Nixon the GOP took a long hard look at "what went wrong. 2 Items lead the list - . a free press under the firmness doctrine, and a strong middle class with enough free time to pay attention.
Under Reagan the "news" was concentrated down to 6 right leaning crops from the hundreds of previous owners and the war on the middle began in earnest. I was essential that no real reporters a la Woodward and Bernstein never have a place to publish and that the middle class became so desperate that their only thoughts would revolve around "putting food on their families"
Add that to the Nixon Southern strategy based upon the reliable racism and ignorance of the southern taker states and you have a road map to the 2016 elections.
The right wing owned "press" has buried the Clinton campaign and given Trump billions in free air time. The fix is in. Are Americans smart enough t avoid this final death blow from the GOP? NO
Under Reagan the "news" was concentrated down to 6 right leaning crops from the hundreds of previous owners and the war on the middle began in earnest. I was essential that no real reporters a la Woodward and Bernstein never have a place to publish and that the middle class became so desperate that their only thoughts would revolve around "putting food on their families"
Add that to the Nixon Southern strategy based upon the reliable racism and ignorance of the southern taker states and you have a road map to the 2016 elections.
The right wing owned "press" has buried the Clinton campaign and given Trump billions in free air time. The fix is in. Are Americans smart enough t avoid this final death blow from the GOP? NO
4
I would say that the toughening of the media's reporting (meaning that lies are called lies) acknowledges the need to avoid unilateral disarmament. To have politicians make obvious false claims, and call them anything but lies, leaves politicians free to say anything. When one participant in the institution is abiding by a different, more stringent, set of rules than the other, well then the less constrained player gains an important edge.
2
It's quite simple. If it is a lie, call it a lie and show why it is a lie. It's your job.
The Fifth Estate has indeed, repeatedly failed Amurca greatly in explaining in the clearest terms possible, the many important issues of the day, and why responsible public policy matters. To us, the Little People.
You've called it right. It's darned important now.
The Fifth Estate has indeed, repeatedly failed Amurca greatly in explaining in the clearest terms possible, the many important issues of the day, and why responsible public policy matters. To us, the Little People.
You've called it right. It's darned important now.
5
Perhaps my first comment was too harsh and thus not accepted. Let me try again. I find the media's very recent flurry of self-justification over the "difficulties" of calling Mr. Trump a liar is too little and too late.
At least 3 options/editorials all written only after the media was played at the Trump hotel infomercial and Birtherism announcement fiasco.
As a television executive was quoted saying "This is going to be fun" regarding the prospect of a Trump candidacy, the media made a specific judgement call very early on regarding how Trump was going to be handled and that call lacked concern for journalistic integrity.
The damage has been done. The debate moderators will not be able to correct past discrepancies. The need and or desire for correct information has long been abandoned. The role of money and its allure cannot be overlooked.
At the same time as we citizens soak up the fallacious Trumpisms we demand the absolute truth regarding the recent shootings of two African American men.
We are not consistent in our demands for 'truth' so should the media be held to a higher standard or merely reflect our contrary nature? I think we need 'good journalism'.
At least 3 options/editorials all written only after the media was played at the Trump hotel infomercial and Birtherism announcement fiasco.
As a television executive was quoted saying "This is going to be fun" regarding the prospect of a Trump candidacy, the media made a specific judgement call very early on regarding how Trump was going to be handled and that call lacked concern for journalistic integrity.
The damage has been done. The debate moderators will not be able to correct past discrepancies. The need and or desire for correct information has long been abandoned. The role of money and its allure cannot be overlooked.
At the same time as we citizens soak up the fallacious Trumpisms we demand the absolute truth regarding the recent shootings of two African American men.
We are not consistent in our demands for 'truth' so should the media be held to a higher standard or merely reflect our contrary nature? I think we need 'good journalism'.
2
Yes. Thank you for your integrity as a journalist. Because this "candidate", if elected, would have his hand on the nuclear trigger, and we have a huge nuclear arsenal in the USA, it is a matter of our survival on the planet to do everything we can to prevent his rise to the presidency. It appears that irresponsible journalism and sensationalist media coverage have contributed to Trump's rise-and his will to power, ignorance, racism and antisemitism as well as his extreme duplicity are a danger to our safety and integrity as a nation and to all human beings living on the earth. Responsible journalism that calls out his lies as fast as they appear is an absolute necessity at this time. And could mean our survival.
6
Reading Mr Kristof and the comments, it quickly becomes apparent that absolutely nothing has changed since the candidates were confirmed. Groundhog Day in our worst nightmares. Wake me in 8 years.
And also, remember to cover the excellent deeds of a quiet person who has been bludgeoned by the GOP and the media for about 35 years. She is very transparent (taxes, foundation, etc.) but because she holds herself somewhat in reserve due to years of being attacked, she is labeled as dishonest. How about getting out that truth, that she has done a tremendous amount of good for people around the world and even with the unending nastiness, still wants to do more.
5
Years ago, when I worked in City Hall, every time Rf Koch was attacked by Jack Newfield, Koch would release a statement repeating the apparently uncontested fact that some years earlier, Newfield had lied about something that Bella Abzug had said about Israel. It was a pretty effective tactic. The problem that journalists have these days is that people expect politicians to lie. Look at the apparent lie that Obama just got caught in about HRC and her email address. Betchya it doesn't affect his approval rating. But in the past at least they expected journalists to tell the truth. Those days are gone. In short, when in a glass house ....
Perhaps it bears repeating the great dictum of one of the greatest newspaper columnists of all time, H.L. Mencken, whose take on the charlatans of his day mirror the rise of Trump,
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people".
"Nobody ever went broke underestimating the intelligence of the American people".
8
I don't think fact checking will play any role. Those who will vote for Trump will do so not because they believe what he says, but rather want to believe.
3
Beautiful. Don't be stenographers. Unfortunately, the people who support Trump have similar motives to the Confederacy. Nothing anyone says or does will make any difference to them. I never knew any Clinton doubters until Sanders made such a big deal about her speaking to bankers and getting paid for it like everyone else does. Taking a fee for a lecture is a LONG ways from taking a bribe for a favor. Thanks Bernie.
4
Just for the fun of it, has anyone ever asked Mr. Sanders if he's ever turned down a fee for speaking anywhere?
The problem isn't simply that the media handed Trump a microphone without fact-checking what he said. The problem is that the media handed Trump a microphone 24/7 for months on end. The media financed Trump's campaign. What an absolute disgrace.
461
"to expose charlatans is not partisanship, but simply good journalism." Unfortunately the NY Times has not yet learned that lesson. Today's front page features an exposure of 31 lies by Trump. But the effect is to reinforce each of his statements which are reproduced in large, bold type, making them the more memorable, while giving the refutation in smaller, light type. The "takeaway" just gives more exposure to what he says. George Lakin has been pointing out for years why this practice is ineffective and even counter-productive. It is a mistake to re-state a lie if you want to counter it. By re-stating it you reinforce it. The public space is not a logical truth-table, where a lie can be negated. It is a competitive realm in which what is remembered is what is salient. Make the truth more engaging and more memorable. Do not repeat the falsehood.
1
One thing that fact checking journalism cannot cure is an ignorant and gullible public. How many people still believe Obama is a Muslim, that Obama was not born in this country, or that climate change is a hoax. When you meet a wall of stupidity your best efforts to set the record straight are wasted on broad segments of our population. And to make matters worse any diligent fact filled reporting that puts a negative light on Trump is viewed as biased journalism. If Trump wins lets shine the light on where it belongs; as harsh as it may seem, a nation filled with morons.
2
I have enough faith in the American people (at least I think I might still) to believe that if this election and these candidates were presented in the right way more people would see through Trump. He is definitely a charlatan. But people who feel drawn to him are likely to avoid a column which calls him that in a headline. How can we separate the (I hope) large number of Americans who support him in order to stick to the establishment from the truly deplorables motivated by racism and fear of others? I still harbor a hope that when the non-deplorables get in the voting booth, many will realize they cannot inflict Trump on our country just to be ornery.
In any case, I appreciate your and other reporters efforts to find an ethical and effective way for journalists to cover this extraordinary election.
In any case, I appreciate your and other reporters efforts to find an ethical and effective way for journalists to cover this extraordinary election.
Here’s an enjoyable, bitter satire clip from Andy Borowitz in the New Yorker:
TRUMP WARNS THAT CLINTON WILL RIG DEBATE BY USING FACTS
“You just watch, folks,” Trump told supporters in Toledo, Ohio. “Crooked Hillary is going to slip in little facts all night long, and that’s how she’s going to try to rig the thing.”
At CNN, a spokesperson assured Trump that the network would do everything in its power to keep the debate “as free of facts as possible.”
“We have a well-established practice at CNN,” the spokesperson said. “If the candidates start straying into facts, data, or other verifiable information, we have instructed the moderators to cut them off.”
Yes, this is the hilarious low standard, set by the press and TV, tho they'll deny it--- that avoids issue talk like the plague. It’s personalities, power plays and polls. This sets up the whole debate style, and why they chose Matt Lauer, the morning show guy for that 1st candidate TV contest.
No wonder the debates may well follow the pattern. Reality TV has taken over with its perfect candidate. But it’s really Illusion TV politics.
TRUMP WARNS THAT CLINTON WILL RIG DEBATE BY USING FACTS
“You just watch, folks,” Trump told supporters in Toledo, Ohio. “Crooked Hillary is going to slip in little facts all night long, and that’s how she’s going to try to rig the thing.”
At CNN, a spokesperson assured Trump that the network would do everything in its power to keep the debate “as free of facts as possible.”
“We have a well-established practice at CNN,” the spokesperson said. “If the candidates start straying into facts, data, or other verifiable information, we have instructed the moderators to cut them off.”
Yes, this is the hilarious low standard, set by the press and TV, tho they'll deny it--- that avoids issue talk like the plague. It’s personalities, power plays and polls. This sets up the whole debate style, and why they chose Matt Lauer, the morning show guy for that 1st candidate TV contest.
No wonder the debates may well follow the pattern. Reality TV has taken over with its perfect candidate. But it’s really Illusion TV politics.
3
"Sure, there are dumb or dogmatic conservatives, just as there are dumb and dogmatic liberals." Does this line sound familiar, Mr. Kristof? Does this sound like a false equivalency to you?
How about this sentence? "Frankly, the torrent of scorn for conservative closed-mindedness confirmed my view that we on the left can be pretty closed-minded ourselves." These unexplicably wrong-minded sentences were written in a previous column of yours suggesting that conservatives should be welcomed into our academic institutions. But since when is it closed-minded to call conservatives out on the truth? Since when is it wrong to convict the criminals?
Some in the media seem to be acting with a greater sense of urgency as this election draws near, as if Trump is somehow more despicable than Mitch McConnell, Ted Cruz, George W. Bush or Dick Cheney. Despicable he certainly is, only louder. The fact is, the media should have been sounding the distress call throughout Nixon's, Reagan's and both Bush's administrations. They should have been sounding the distress call through the Tea Party, through this obstructionist Republican Congress, and through the circus of a Republican convention!!
But no, it is more entertaining to cover the clowns, and now here we are, aren't we? Instead of giving equal consideration to the criminals, the media--including you--should have been holding them to the high standards you seem to reserve for Democrats. Shameful!!
How about this sentence? "Frankly, the torrent of scorn for conservative closed-mindedness confirmed my view that we on the left can be pretty closed-minded ourselves." These unexplicably wrong-minded sentences were written in a previous column of yours suggesting that conservatives should be welcomed into our academic institutions. But since when is it closed-minded to call conservatives out on the truth? Since when is it wrong to convict the criminals?
Some in the media seem to be acting with a greater sense of urgency as this election draws near, as if Trump is somehow more despicable than Mitch McConnell, Ted Cruz, George W. Bush or Dick Cheney. Despicable he certainly is, only louder. The fact is, the media should have been sounding the distress call throughout Nixon's, Reagan's and both Bush's administrations. They should have been sounding the distress call through the Tea Party, through this obstructionist Republican Congress, and through the circus of a Republican convention!!
But no, it is more entertaining to cover the clowns, and now here we are, aren't we? Instead of giving equal consideration to the criminals, the media--including you--should have been holding them to the high standards you seem to reserve for Democrats. Shameful!!
The CBS CEO Leslie Moonves said it all back in February:
"It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS," he said of the presidential race...Moonves called the campaign for president a "circus" full of "bomb throwing," and he hopes it continues..."Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? ... The money's rolling in and this is fun," he said... "I've never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going," said Moonves."
Thanks to these sociopaths who run our corporations, they care more about the money than about our country.
Disgusting. It just may be a terrible 4 years for the USA and the world.
"It may not be good for America, but it's damn good for CBS," he said of the presidential race...Moonves called the campaign for president a "circus" full of "bomb throwing," and he hopes it continues..."Man, who would have expected the ride we're all having right now? ... The money's rolling in and this is fun," he said... "I've never seen anything like this, and this going to be a very good year for us. Sorry. It's a terrible thing to say. But, bring it on, Donald. Keep going," said Moonves."
Thanks to these sociopaths who run our corporations, they care more about the money than about our country.
Disgusting. It just may be a terrible 4 years for the USA and the world.
2
Well said, Mr. Kristoff. One can only hope that this sudden awakening by some of ghe media is not too late.
Same old, same old. One of several obligatory New York Times columns today, yesterday, tomorrow, on the horrors of Donald Trump and how the media must expose those horrors.
None of those horrors would carry any weight in this presidential election, as they are doing, if it were not for the fact that Hillary Clinton is such a flawed candidate. Kristof buries his head in the sand and steadfastly refuses to recognize that. A New York Times editorial today endorsing Hillary Clinton reads as if the editorial board were on another planet. Fox News is, and has been from Day One, totally and unabashedly in the tank for Donald Trump. Kristof would have it, invoking Edward R. Murrow and Senator McCarthy, that the obligation of journalists is to emulate Fox News, except this time as the anti-Trump team in the tank for Hillary Clinton.
It is said, entirely correctly, that if the Democratic candidate were anyone but Hillary Clinton, a Democratic win would be a sure thing. It is also said, again entirely correctly, that if the Republican candidate were anyone but Donald Trump, a Republican win would be a sure thing. Kristof embraces the parts of the sayings that are putdowns of Trump and pays no attention to the parts that are putdowns of Mrs. Clinton.
I suppose I should be thankful. A break from Kristof’s “What Whites Just Don’t Get” columns.
None of those horrors would carry any weight in this presidential election, as they are doing, if it were not for the fact that Hillary Clinton is such a flawed candidate. Kristof buries his head in the sand and steadfastly refuses to recognize that. A New York Times editorial today endorsing Hillary Clinton reads as if the editorial board were on another planet. Fox News is, and has been from Day One, totally and unabashedly in the tank for Donald Trump. Kristof would have it, invoking Edward R. Murrow and Senator McCarthy, that the obligation of journalists is to emulate Fox News, except this time as the anti-Trump team in the tank for Hillary Clinton.
It is said, entirely correctly, that if the Democratic candidate were anyone but Hillary Clinton, a Democratic win would be a sure thing. It is also said, again entirely correctly, that if the Republican candidate were anyone but Donald Trump, a Republican win would be a sure thing. Kristof embraces the parts of the sayings that are putdowns of Trump and pays no attention to the parts that are putdowns of Mrs. Clinton.
I suppose I should be thankful. A break from Kristof’s “What Whites Just Don’t Get” columns.
2
How does a reporter cover someone like Trump? A question I’m sure was banged out in desperation by Nicholas Kristof; a President Chump lurking in the garden.
So how do you cover Trump? First thing you do Mr. Kristof, is get over yourself.
It is not your job to prevent Trump from becoming president. It is your job to report about him, and write commentary that should provide a useful perspective about him for readers.
If you do that job well, like Murrow did as you cite, or as Woodward and Bernstein did, it can help prevent Trump from becoming president. But it is not the job of reporters to save the world from itself; Mr. Kristof’s self-imposed guilt notwithstanding.
If Mr. Kristof is this shook up now, how will he keep his composure in writing about a newly inaugurated Pres. Chump? I fear we may find out, for he is lurking in the garden.
So how do you cover Trump? First thing you do Mr. Kristof, is get over yourself.
It is not your job to prevent Trump from becoming president. It is your job to report about him, and write commentary that should provide a useful perspective about him for readers.
If you do that job well, like Murrow did as you cite, or as Woodward and Bernstein did, it can help prevent Trump from becoming president. But it is not the job of reporters to save the world from itself; Mr. Kristof’s self-imposed guilt notwithstanding.
If Mr. Kristof is this shook up now, how will he keep his composure in writing about a newly inaugurated Pres. Chump? I fear we may find out, for he is lurking in the garden.
1
The 38% of respondents who "say" President Obama was not born in the United Stared know better. They jus hate him and this is how they react. Let's be clear on this matter. There is no false belief. There is hatred and racism.
4
And ironically it was the Hillary campaign that started the birth certificate controversy in the 1st place, but "real" journalists won't point that fact out because it might cost her the election. Tell me again, what is the job description of a "journalist" again?
On TV, it would be so awesome to have Closed Captioning for the judgement impaired - a Politifact real-time parsing of everything that Trump says.
In print media, EVERY utterance from Trump's undisciplined pie hole should be directly followed, in brackets, by a Politifact score.
Use the Donald as an extreme test case. If this beta doesn't implode, it'll be sure to work on every future tin pot dictator and US politician.
In print media, EVERY utterance from Trump's undisciplined pie hole should be directly followed, in brackets, by a Politifact score.
Use the Donald as an extreme test case. If this beta doesn't implode, it'll be sure to work on every future tin pot dictator and US politician.
2
Yes! The media did grease the skids for Trump, just as all the embedded reporters fell over themselves to hawk the invasion of Iraq. All in the name of corporate marketing. (I refuse to call it journalism.) Thanks for nothing on both counts.
3
Indeed. What's more, an unchallenged lie is nothing more that free political propaganda.
3
I don't believe that the American people, or the Republican leadership, or vested corporate interests, have fully grasped the impact if Donald Trump were to win election.
The man himself is unstable. He has been involved in over 3,000 law suits, 4 bankruptcies, and too many twitter and personal feuds to mention.
He has staked multiple positions on every issue and has made a mockery of facts, data, statistics, and truth itself.
He insulted his way through the GOP primary.
His opponents, with a few notable exceptions, are so craven and weak-kneed that they accept the abuse of their persons, their families, their country and plead for more.
He is the first presidential candidate in memory to have financial ties to a foreign adversary, refuses to disclose his tax returns, and asks for and receives Russian help in hacking the DNC to assist his election.
He is not a change candidate, he is a chaos candidate, advocating the dismantling of NATO, withdrawal from NATO, and unrestricted nuclear proliferation.
The change he suggests is ruinous.
There are Republican leaders who could act with the courage of the people who have protected American democracy for centuries.
They could actively oppose him, but they are too fearful and feeble.
The markets reacted poorly to Brexit, a simple renegotiation by the UK of access to the European Single market as a non EU member.
People just cannot fathom the market's reaction to a Trump victory.
It would be Trumpageddon.
The man himself is unstable. He has been involved in over 3,000 law suits, 4 bankruptcies, and too many twitter and personal feuds to mention.
He has staked multiple positions on every issue and has made a mockery of facts, data, statistics, and truth itself.
He insulted his way through the GOP primary.
His opponents, with a few notable exceptions, are so craven and weak-kneed that they accept the abuse of their persons, their families, their country and plead for more.
He is the first presidential candidate in memory to have financial ties to a foreign adversary, refuses to disclose his tax returns, and asks for and receives Russian help in hacking the DNC to assist his election.
He is not a change candidate, he is a chaos candidate, advocating the dismantling of NATO, withdrawal from NATO, and unrestricted nuclear proliferation.
The change he suggests is ruinous.
There are Republican leaders who could act with the courage of the people who have protected American democracy for centuries.
They could actively oppose him, but they are too fearful and feeble.
The markets reacted poorly to Brexit, a simple renegotiation by the UK of access to the European Single market as a non EU member.
People just cannot fathom the market's reaction to a Trump victory.
It would be Trumpageddon.
4
"Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling."
Implied in "truth-telling", as you call it, is to report on all the facts, not just the ones that fit with your narrative. Of course, that only applies to reporters. Opinion writers such as yourself can shade the truth all day long and usually do. How else to account for the endless shilling for Hillary all this time? Just because Trump isn't fit to be President doesn't make your case that Hillary is. She wasn't "fit" enough to claim the nomination in 2008 - what made Obama the more "fit" candidate, Nicholas? All she needed was a gig as Secretary of State? Gee, Obama was a rookie senator back then, and Hillary's allegedly massive resumé wasn't enough to win the nomination.
Whether you care to admit it or not, a lot of people just plain don't trust Hillary. No matter how much you point out all of Trump's numerous faults, it will not make people like Hillary any better. But you, Krugman, Blow, and Friedman keep trying...
Implied in "truth-telling", as you call it, is to report on all the facts, not just the ones that fit with your narrative. Of course, that only applies to reporters. Opinion writers such as yourself can shade the truth all day long and usually do. How else to account for the endless shilling for Hillary all this time? Just because Trump isn't fit to be President doesn't make your case that Hillary is. She wasn't "fit" enough to claim the nomination in 2008 - what made Obama the more "fit" candidate, Nicholas? All she needed was a gig as Secretary of State? Gee, Obama was a rookie senator back then, and Hillary's allegedly massive resumé wasn't enough to win the nomination.
Whether you care to admit it or not, a lot of people just plain don't trust Hillary. No matter how much you point out all of Trump's numerous faults, it will not make people like Hillary any better. But you, Krugman, Blow, and Friedman keep trying...
4
I'm going to write in Noam Chomsky.
The U.S. Media: 'Mr. Trump says the world is flat. Mrs. Clinton says it is round. We report, you decide.'
I'm sick.
I'm sick.
16
It is interesting how this election campaign has blown a phony and stupid but cardinal principle of journalism out of the water: "balance". Giving "balance" to reportage of Hillary and Donald translates into phony equivalence, lending legitimacy to the Trump campaign that it does not have, has not earned, and is impossible. The better and only criterion of objective journalism is evidence--evidence supporting what the reporter says happened, and evidence (or lack of it) supporting what the candidates are saying. Thinking on the basis of evidence is the only reliable criterion of truth for candidates, journalists, and their followers. If we had been doing that Trump would not have become the nominee. I blame that on the dumb idea of "balance" as a criterion of truth or fairness.
4
The Donald may be guilty of overstatement at times, Nicholas, but his underlying points tend to be accurate. Your candidate, on the other hand, is purposely, lawyerly deceptive as she tries to hide unethical behavior. If you want to say we can’t exactly prove it, fine, but we all know it, and it apparently frustrates you that we all know it. (You know it too, right?)
You write that “Only 6% of Americans say they have a great deal of confidence in the press,” then you go on to demonstrate here why that is. With only passing reference to grandma’s baggage you sit astride your very tall horse to call The Donald a “con artist,” a “duplicitous demagogue,” a “fraud,” “a charlatan,” and a “mythomaniac.” I’ll go out on a limb and say you are not impartial about the man. Stick to the opinion pages and you’re good to go.
But does this type of bias belongs in serious reporting? Though you try very hard to legitimize, even require, the loss of objectivity among those who would cover The Donald, the answer is No. And your implication that reporters have some special insight into The Truth that the great unwashed do not is offensive... and laughable. Seriously—who is the con man here, Nicholas? Methinks it’s you.
You write that “Only 6% of Americans say they have a great deal of confidence in the press,” then you go on to demonstrate here why that is. With only passing reference to grandma’s baggage you sit astride your very tall horse to call The Donald a “con artist,” a “duplicitous demagogue,” a “fraud,” “a charlatan,” and a “mythomaniac.” I’ll go out on a limb and say you are not impartial about the man. Stick to the opinion pages and you’re good to go.
But does this type of bias belongs in serious reporting? Though you try very hard to legitimize, even require, the loss of objectivity among those who would cover The Donald, the answer is No. And your implication that reporters have some special insight into The Truth that the great unwashed do not is offensive... and laughable. Seriously—who is the con man here, Nicholas? Methinks it’s you.
3
I think the biggest mistake with Trump is the notion that no matter how bad he may be, he can HIRE good people to run the government. And if people do not work out he can say: "You're fired!"
This, I believe, is the big LIE of Trump.
------------------------------------------------
I hope that that Nick Kristof and other reporters will focus on the danger of a totally unqualified CLOWN deciding the future of this nation.
The only thing we have to fear is... Donald (Lying) Trump.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
This, I believe, is the big LIE of Trump.
------------------------------------------------
I hope that that Nick Kristof and other reporters will focus on the danger of a totally unqualified CLOWN deciding the future of this nation.
The only thing we have to fear is... Donald (Lying) Trump.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------
2
Thank you for making a tough statement for the type of critical thinking I expect of an excellent reporter. Your honesty regarding the inadequate reporting leading up to the Iraq war, along with your examples of reporting that dared to disclose uncomfortable truths, puts the present poor reporting in context. Bravo.
1
This election has been a rude awakening in so many ways, not the least of which is witnessing journalists I have admired and followed for years, all but forsake the Journalists Creed. I keep swearing off favorites, changing channels, and writing letters of disappointment. A lie is morphed into a "stretching of the truth", and false equivalencies are the order of the day.
But, while I wring my hands and rant, Hillary Clinton forges ahead with strength, faith and steadfastness. As a result, my support and admiration has only grown. I dearly hope to call her Madam President.
But, while I wring my hands and rant, Hillary Clinton forges ahead with strength, faith and steadfastness. As a result, my support and admiration has only grown. I dearly hope to call her Madam President.
4
While I agree that the media has given Donald Trump a pass because he like they are mainly in the entertainment business and no longer, with exceptions like this paper, in the truth telling and Investigative journalism business. So, a false equivalence on the issues of honesty and trustworthiness has been unfortunately created by Trump's outrageous antics based on lies from "birtherism" to being against the Iraq War to building a great wall paid for by Mexico and the media's obsession with Hillary's emails. What bothers me most, as a professional psychologist, is the constant lying, grandiose plans with little detail, and a set of policies that are so punitive in nature from deporting all Hispanic immigrants including their. citizen children, banning all Muslims, and recently reinstating the racist stop and frisk program as a solution to the endless series of murders of African-American males by police that only an authoritarian autocrat like Vladimir Putin would endorse. There is absolutely no equivalency between these simplistic and deranged proposals and those thoughtful and compassionate ones of Hillary Clinton. And, where is the media? And, for that matter, most disappointedly, where are the Democrats when they have a strong economic record to run on?
2
Good article. And good luck. Thanks to Faux News (blared into every household and hotel room in the word). opinion is the same as fact, integrity is for suckers, and lies are not lies . Remember Palin, who could not even string together a cogent sentence, who couldn't even tell us what newspapers she read, and who thought the UK was run by the Queen ? She almost sat in the white house. The Donald will make her look like FDR. It's too late for "honest journalism". The well is so poisoned that if you dare to call The Donald out on his breathtaking ignorance, his blatant lies, his profound lack of experience, judgement, and temperament, you will be labeled "lame stream media", and accused of bias and rigging the election.
3
How I wish more "journalists" would share your views. Trump, a creature of alt-right at the very least (if not flat-out naziism), must be stopped.
2
An informed electorate will never emerge if journalists report fiction and fact in a balanced manner, nor if cacophony swamps the voices of reason.
1
It's tough when an untrustworthy media report on untrustworthy politicians. The consequences of a con-artist president of either party would be acute. that so many people are willing to believe in myths and lies underscores what Margaret Thatcher said years ago, "The fabric of civilization is thin".
1
You are absolutely spot on. The media should be filters for truth. Truth telling is not biased journalism and the media has to be strong enough to endure the heat. Let the facts fall where they may. Until recently the media has failed its fiduciary responsibility to protect the public. Donald Trump is a monster created by media Frankenstein's who were concerned with ratings not journalistic integrity. The content of his tax returns are the most important documents in recent American History, and that's not hyperbole. There must be a 24/7 barrage by the media to demand their release every hour, every day, every question.
The fact that the press has to respond to what it thinks the public wants is part of the problem, IMHO.
Who, exactly, is asking for this "false equivalency?" Not many people besides those on the far right who have been trumpeting the theme of "liberal media bias" for decades. And I am sure that the intellectual leaders of this particular movement have done so with what we are seeing as part of the eventual result. A cowed media that is so afraid of claims of bias that objectivity is replaced with false equivalence.
Is the job of the press to entertain, make money or inform the public? Decisions need to be made, not by us but by those who lead the media. Is it a business or a profession that depends upon integrity? A career or a calling?
Clearly this election shows that such probing introspection needs to be taken. Kudos to those who are willing to look at their part in it.
Who, exactly, is asking for this "false equivalency?" Not many people besides those on the far right who have been trumpeting the theme of "liberal media bias" for decades. And I am sure that the intellectual leaders of this particular movement have done so with what we are seeing as part of the eventual result. A cowed media that is so afraid of claims of bias that objectivity is replaced with false equivalence.
Is the job of the press to entertain, make money or inform the public? Decisions need to be made, not by us but by those who lead the media. Is it a business or a profession that depends upon integrity? A career or a calling?
Clearly this election shows that such probing introspection needs to be taken. Kudos to those who are willing to look at their part in it.
2
Exposing a charlatan such as Mr. Trump is one of journalism's callings, but it is only one half of the equation. Just as important - if not more so - is to actually write about each party's platform...educate the public on what each party has written - in its own words - about how they view the future of this country.
Talk about ISSUES!!! - and talk about issues in DETAIL!!! - write a SERIES!!!
So far, the media has played right into Mr. Trump's game, allowing him to make this "contest" a match of personalities...but this is NOT a reality TV show...it's the most important job on the planet that will determine much about our national future, our kids' lives a generation from now, and beyond.
Stop trying to sell papers and advertising like we're watching wrestling.
Start educating, and that includes both calling out what's wrong...AND...showing what - in its place - is right.
Talk about ISSUES!!! - and talk about issues in DETAIL!!! - write a SERIES!!!
So far, the media has played right into Mr. Trump's game, allowing him to make this "contest" a match of personalities...but this is NOT a reality TV show...it's the most important job on the planet that will determine much about our national future, our kids' lives a generation from now, and beyond.
Stop trying to sell papers and advertising like we're watching wrestling.
Start educating, and that includes both calling out what's wrong...AND...showing what - in its place - is right.
5
Obviously, truth leaves a bad taste in Trump's mouth, huge, very huge!
Thank you, Mr. Kristof, for this column. If only the NY Times and other major media entities would recognize their responsibility and be real journalists.
Yes, the American media have let the American people down, but I fear the American people (many millions, but clearly, not all) have allowed themselves to become so ignorant of what is really going on in American politics that the media have their job cut out for them if they are to change the direction we're headed. The question, this election, is have enough Americans let things go so far that they would elect a dangerous fraud like Donald Trump? That we are even asking this question is a sign of how serious our situation is.
Yes, the American media have let the American people down, but I fear the American people (many millions, but clearly, not all) have allowed themselves to become so ignorant of what is really going on in American politics that the media have their job cut out for them if they are to change the direction we're headed. The question, this election, is have enough Americans let things go so far that they would elect a dangerous fraud like Donald Trump? That we are even asking this question is a sign of how serious our situation is.
1
Good piece. Perhaps you nailed the problem without realizing it: "might incline some casual voters ...."
Too bad the debates wont have a family feud style "lie buzzer" - with 3 buzzes meaning your opponent gets a chance to steal. If I was in charge of the buzzer, I'd preemptively ring it every time Trump drew in a breath and opened his lie-hole.
A guy can dream :)
A guy can dream :)
Journalists, print, radio, tv, web, should honestly portray Donald Trump as a chronic liar and a cheat unprepared for the responsibilities of the presidency.
That's the right thing to do. On the other hand, that probably won't cost him any votes.
That's the right thing to do. On the other hand, that probably won't cost him any votes.
1
Susan, Hillary Clinton and her husband left the White House 500k in debt but have since amassed a fortune of over 200 million dollars. Mrs. Clinton used her position as Secretary of State to establish an elaborate pay to play system to enrich her foundation at the expense of our National Security. Her private email server was set up to hide this elaborate scheme. She would not pass an FBI background and is not fit to hold the office she seeks.
1
Another perfect example of someone shallow of mind or just a die-hard Republican, or both-and there's plenty of them, readily willing to produce untruths to keep the notion that Hillary Clinton is not to be trusted. Spin, simply recycled notions that are untrue. All the while Trump being the most corrupt, bigoted, boorish, lying (proven over and over again) candidate in recent history.
1
That's a cute story, Richard, but where are the facts that support it?
1
There is right wing, biased media on one side (Fox Faked News, talk radio from coast-to-coast and dozens, if not hundreds, of websites) and there is establishment media on another side, still trying to play it straight and still groping for a way for the truth to break through conventional practices. This is one reason I quit daily news reporting: objectivity and careful reporting often allow lies to be presented as truth.
Major national and regional media sold their souls to corporations early in the 20th century in the name of big profits. The sales package was objectivity, but the underhanded part of it is that we could be a little thorn in the side of big power, but we wouldn't try to overthrow power. We could rock the boat a bit, but not punch holes in the bottom.
Here's a thought: how about having two reporters covering each candidate, one to serve the "for the record" need and another to do interpretive reporting? Just imagine the impact if the national networks and cable channels reported on the candidates day and then followed that report with one dealing with lies, misstatements and distortions uttered by the candidates.
No one will follow my suggestion, of course. The editors and producers will continue wringing their hands muttering, "What can we do?" right through election day.
Most people who support Trump made up their minds early and aren't going to be changed. That doesn't mean that facts shouldn't be reported for those who still have open minds.
Major national and regional media sold their souls to corporations early in the 20th century in the name of big profits. The sales package was objectivity, but the underhanded part of it is that we could be a little thorn in the side of big power, but we wouldn't try to overthrow power. We could rock the boat a bit, but not punch holes in the bottom.
Here's a thought: how about having two reporters covering each candidate, one to serve the "for the record" need and another to do interpretive reporting? Just imagine the impact if the national networks and cable channels reported on the candidates day and then followed that report with one dealing with lies, misstatements and distortions uttered by the candidates.
No one will follow my suggestion, of course. The editors and producers will continue wringing their hands muttering, "What can we do?" right through election day.
Most people who support Trump made up their minds early and aren't going to be changed. That doesn't mean that facts shouldn't be reported for those who still have open minds.
3
Like sports - play-by-play and "color" side by side. Good idea this year.
1
Mr. Kristof:
Thank you! Keep up the informative and needed posts. The thought of Trump as president of our great nation sickens me. It does not seem as though he is even trying to be honest or forthright. He is certainly not transparent. Every important thing about him is hidden: taxes, bankruptcies, unpaid contractors, debts, meaningful medical information.
HRC has a checkered history, certainly, but nearly all of it is right out there in plain sight. Plenty of transparency there, as well as multiple years of service and experience in government. She would be a decent president, a woman of character.
Donald J. Trump is a disgraceful disaster waiting to happen. Makes me shudder in revulsion.
Thank you! Keep up the informative and needed posts. The thought of Trump as president of our great nation sickens me. It does not seem as though he is even trying to be honest or forthright. He is certainly not transparent. Every important thing about him is hidden: taxes, bankruptcies, unpaid contractors, debts, meaningful medical information.
HRC has a checkered history, certainly, but nearly all of it is right out there in plain sight. Plenty of transparency there, as well as multiple years of service and experience in government. She would be a decent president, a woman of character.
Donald J. Trump is a disgraceful disaster waiting to happen. Makes me shudder in revulsion.
The press is, in part, responsible for the poor judgment of a significant minority of our people who would vote for Trump. However, several decades of reactionary talk radio and of poorly educated student, with little or no education in civics, have created a large population of Archie Bunkers, who have little concept of where their self interest lies or of what policies are in the national interest.
The press and the schools should be doing far more in preparing our people to evaluate economic and social issues and the politicians who take positions with regard to those issues.
That Trump has been able to get as far as he has is a disgraceful stain upon the reputation of the United States. Lets hope we can scrub that stain out at the ballot box, in November.
The press and the schools should be doing far more in preparing our people to evaluate economic and social issues and the politicians who take positions with regard to those issues.
That Trump has been able to get as far as he has is a disgraceful stain upon the reputation of the United States. Lets hope we can scrub that stain out at the ballot box, in November.
258
One thing that I noticed in the Republican primary debates is that Trump makes rude remarks and the other candidates didn't know how to respond to him because most people are taught to be polite in that type of format.
If Trump punches Clinton, which I'm sure that he will do to cover his ignorance of anything of substance and to show how tough he pretends to be, then she needs to punch him back. Hard. Or the voters will think that she's weak and that could be fatal. Don't show any weakness when dealing with Trump.
If Trump punches Clinton, which I'm sure that he will do to cover his ignorance of anything of substance and to show how tough he pretends to be, then she needs to punch him back. Hard. Or the voters will think that she's weak and that could be fatal. Don't show any weakness when dealing with Trump.
3
Trump is a successful mythomaniac only because some people need to believe in myths in order to make some sense out of their lives. They believe in the myth of an impenetrable wall on Americas' Mexican frontier to be paid for by Mexico because they need to in order to explain their own inability to prosper Ina changing world economy. They need a Zeus or a Thor but, unfortunately, the closest they can get to such mythological figures is a Trump. How sad for them.
3
"I believe that debate moderators can press Trump when he lies or evades."
Suggested rewrite: 'All debate moderators must press both candidates whenever they appear to lie or evade'.
Let's have some heroically gutsy moderation in these debates, twisted hate-tweets from the fringes be damned. Gutsy yet impartial moderation may seem "a hard ask", as the Aussies say, but isn't there an imperturbably even-minded, truth-seeking tv journalist or two in the wings waiting to join the ranks of E. R. Murrow? The fate of the nation may partly depend on the answer.
Suggested rewrite: 'All debate moderators must press both candidates whenever they appear to lie or evade'.
Let's have some heroically gutsy moderation in these debates, twisted hate-tweets from the fringes be damned. Gutsy yet impartial moderation may seem "a hard ask", as the Aussies say, but isn't there an imperturbably even-minded, truth-seeking tv journalist or two in the wings waiting to join the ranks of E. R. Murrow? The fate of the nation may partly depend on the answer.
2
Every single word Edward R. Murrow would say would be picked over, dissected and distorted by the other side. His every personal habit, relationship would be combed through for scandal-mongering. There would be websites devoted and solely dedicated to bringing him down. There would be pundits whose job consisted of mocking him and saying whatever creatively nasty things they could.
Same is true for Walter Cronkite. The last dinosaur, Dan Rather was made extinct by the irruption of professional trolls. That species is what is currently thriving and is becoming dominant.
Same is true for Walter Cronkite. The last dinosaur, Dan Rather was made extinct by the irruption of professional trolls. That species is what is currently thriving and is becoming dominant.
Our eneMedia was happy to wink and cover Trump heavily during the primaries because they thought he was doing their work - attacking other Republicans and destroying the party. Never in their wildest dreams did they imagine he could come anywhere near Hillary in the polls. In a perfect world they would have cheered on Bernie, their true soulmate. But they know they need to support the most leftward VIABLE candidate, and the worst or weakest Republican (in their opinion). The sight of their plan backfiring on them is fantastic. I just hope we see it through and don't let them drag Reptillary across the finish line
This is just another piece from someone in Hilliary Clinton's tank. A friend showed me - Even news program in an Asian country (not China) pointed out today that 9 out of ten American news stations are in Hilliary's tank. It is shameful that American liberal media are so looked down upon. Well, even with almost all media workers' help, Clinton still cannot pull away. Because all Americans are not fools.
If those Americans don't believe Trump when he says he'll violate most of your Constitutional rights (which I can document), or do believe him when he says it, yet still vote for him, I must disagree with your final statement.
1
I have not only lost my faith that Americans can tell the difference between a charlatan and a highly qualified candidate, I have lost my faith that the 'news' even cares about reporting facts vs ratings. Every single word of Trump's hits the headlines, followed by 'where is Hillary?' stories. If it weren't so disgusting it would be funny.
I have STOPPED watching CNN (never watched Fox) and the nightly news because there has been hardly a moment since the primaries began they haven't splashed Trump's face and dribble all over the airways. Other than NYT and WP, and msnbc, an average person cannot find a story about the race that is both factual and bothered with truth telling. I am reminded of the old "ring around the color" ads - every person hated them but they sold laundry detergent like crazy, including to people who hated the ads. No wonder so many fools have bought Trumps lies.
I have STOPPED watching CNN (never watched Fox) and the nightly news because there has been hardly a moment since the primaries began they haven't splashed Trump's face and dribble all over the airways. Other than NYT and WP, and msnbc, an average person cannot find a story about the race that is both factual and bothered with truth telling. I am reminded of the old "ring around the color" ads - every person hated them but they sold laundry detergent like crazy, including to people who hated the ads. No wonder so many fools have bought Trumps lies.
3
The media had a fun time giving Trump unlimited free coverage which helped him to dispose of 16 Republican candidates during the primaries. Now he is in a great position to win because he has an opponent who is even weaker than he is.
Anyone wonder why some conservatives, just prior to the first presidential debate, have so transparently started calling for a restriction on the moderator’s role? They do not want the moderator to intervene with real time fact checking on a candidate’s answers. Hmm… so Trump can stand up there and continue spouting bald-faced lies to the largest American TV audience in the history of presidential debates? It’s a tacit admission by conservatives that Trump lies and they don’t want him caught in the act in front of Americans, many of who might be seeing him debate for the first time?
Mr. Kristof is entirely correct when he says, “I believe that debate moderators can press Trump when he lies or evades.” After all, this is the presidency of the United States we are talking about, the most powerful office in the world – not of a dictatorship, but of a democracy – of the people, for the people and by the people. The person, who might occupy this revered position, cannot be seen as one who lies without consequence – if Trump lies, he should be called on it. We cannot expect any less from our moderators.
Mr. Kristof is entirely correct when he says, “I believe that debate moderators can press Trump when he lies or evades.” After all, this is the presidency of the United States we are talking about, the most powerful office in the world – not of a dictatorship, but of a democracy – of the people, for the people and by the people. The person, who might occupy this revered position, cannot be seen as one who lies without consequence – if Trump lies, he should be called on it. We cannot expect any less from our moderators.
4
"I’ve sometimes had the same distressing feeling I felt in the run-up to the war in Iraq — that we in the media were greasing the skids to a bad outcome for our country. "
Not that you mentioned your feelings in your columns, which were howlingly pro-war.
Not that you mentioned your feelings in your columns, which were howlingly pro-war.
1
This is one of the most thoughtful, even-handed and, yes, deservedly self-critical articles I have seen on how to approach this very knotty problem. I understand the need for fairness. I wouldn't want our press to "take sides" based on ideology. However, there is a much more insidious way of "taking sides", which we've clumsily tried to describe with the term "false equivalency" - where 100 Trump sins are compressed to the size of Hillary's five. In other words, reporting becomes horribly unfair, while trying to be extra-fair. The road to hell, etc.
One more thing, if the "Sniper Fire" incident is an example cited of Hillary's so-called lack of trustworthiness - I'd like to extend an open invitation to attend our cognitive neuroscience seminar. I personally never include the "Muslims celebrating on tv" nor the "people jumping out of the WTC Towers" that Trump claimed to see from four miles away, in my criticisms of Trump. Because that would indeed be unfair.
Memory modulates itself all the time, especially under stressful situations, and we all remember things that never happened, or remember details that we just feared, or that someone else told us, as our own. John Smith or I get away with it because we're not on record 24/7. Clinton and Trump, and other people equally scrutinized, don't. Doesn't make them untrustworthy. Just normal.
The difference is, do we correct ourselves when faced with the evidence - or not.
One more thing, if the "Sniper Fire" incident is an example cited of Hillary's so-called lack of trustworthiness - I'd like to extend an open invitation to attend our cognitive neuroscience seminar. I personally never include the "Muslims celebrating on tv" nor the "people jumping out of the WTC Towers" that Trump claimed to see from four miles away, in my criticisms of Trump. Because that would indeed be unfair.
Memory modulates itself all the time, especially under stressful situations, and we all remember things that never happened, or remember details that we just feared, or that someone else told us, as our own. John Smith or I get away with it because we're not on record 24/7. Clinton and Trump, and other people equally scrutinized, don't. Doesn't make them untrustworthy. Just normal.
The difference is, do we correct ourselves when faced with the evidence - or not.
Moderator asks a question.
Trump: A hazy, repetitive, boastful, hyperbolic off-point tirade empty of anything resembling reality or a fact.
Moderator: Please answer the question.
Trump: Another hazy, repetitive, boastful, hyperbolic off-point tirade empty of anything resembling reality or a fact.
Moderator: Mr. Trump, thank you for that, but you still have not answered my question.
Trump: I DID answer ...
Moderator: Well, can you clarify what you mean by ...
Trump: Well, tTo be perfectly honest, you must be in bed with crooked Hillary ... this debate is fixed, a horrible farce ... a disaster really ... that I will tell you.
Oh please let this happen Monday night.
Trump: A hazy, repetitive, boastful, hyperbolic off-point tirade empty of anything resembling reality or a fact.
Moderator: Please answer the question.
Trump: Another hazy, repetitive, boastful, hyperbolic off-point tirade empty of anything resembling reality or a fact.
Moderator: Mr. Trump, thank you for that, but you still have not answered my question.
Trump: I DID answer ...
Moderator: Well, can you clarify what you mean by ...
Trump: Well, tTo be perfectly honest, you must be in bed with crooked Hillary ... this debate is fixed, a horrible farce ... a disaster really ... that I will tell you.
Oh please let this happen Monday night.
2
So, let me see if I have you right. You want to take air time AWAY from Clinton so some unknown television personality can poke Trump with a stick? What, Trump is just going to sit there and take it? Hardly. Since the gloves will be off, he'll take all the time he wants slinging mud, while Clinton just stands there on the sidelines, looking foolish. If she tries to break in, she'll look like she's ganging up on him. If she tries to change the subject, Trump will take the opportunity to say how biased the press is.
In every possible way this is bad television. I hope to God no one in the broadcast booth is even THINKING about taking such bad advice.
In every possible way this is bad television. I hope to God no one in the broadcast booth is even THINKING about taking such bad advice.
In my opinion moderators shouldn't be a fact checkers. But they should expose candidates who blatantly refuse to answer questions and pivot to unrelated talking point. A moderator should politely talk over and insist on answering the question.
186
If so, then you do not understand the role of journalism. If we ask journalists to moderate debates, then said moderators *must* do their jobs.
Turn the tables. Have fun. Report that Donald Trump met with strange green people that told him he should be President. Let him deny it.
Ridicule is the only tool. There are no figures like Edward R. Murrow that can summon the truth, and effectively call out Mr Trump as a charlatan.
Ridicule is the only tool. There are no figures like Edward R. Murrow that can summon the truth, and effectively call out Mr Trump as a charlatan.
3
In the 50s we had mass political hysteria with fear of the Soviets as the big enemy.
Today, money drives all. Political media junk is just what we get when big money finances and picks nominees, and big media monopolies have a stake in amplifying absurdly prolonged, sensationalized campaigns.
Values of public service are gone. Trump’s outrageousness is a gift to media and Dems, and the horse race obscures all other values.
It's popular now for columnists to criticize the media’s Trump/Clinton coverage. Then they look righteous while they cash in on the circus themselves. What a gig! It lets these writers avoid the issues again. The more lousy coverage, the more material for critics. Is this all planned or what? Just kidding.
So, Mr. Kristof---start a trend. Break away from the packs (or pacs). Devote your columns from now on to a crucial, serious campaign issue every week—each candidate’s position, pro/con, and the effect on all our lives. When does the citizen majority start getting some old fashioned representation for their taxation?
Old fashioned journalism---afflict the comfortable, don’t comfort the afflicted. Don’t feed the giant media beast.
Today, money drives all. Political media junk is just what we get when big money finances and picks nominees, and big media monopolies have a stake in amplifying absurdly prolonged, sensationalized campaigns.
Values of public service are gone. Trump’s outrageousness is a gift to media and Dems, and the horse race obscures all other values.
It's popular now for columnists to criticize the media’s Trump/Clinton coverage. Then they look righteous while they cash in on the circus themselves. What a gig! It lets these writers avoid the issues again. The more lousy coverage, the more material for critics. Is this all planned or what? Just kidding.
So, Mr. Kristof---start a trend. Break away from the packs (or pacs). Devote your columns from now on to a crucial, serious campaign issue every week—each candidate’s position, pro/con, and the effect on all our lives. When does the citizen majority start getting some old fashioned representation for their taxation?
Old fashioned journalism---afflict the comfortable, don’t comfort the afflicted. Don’t feed the giant media beast.
2
This might be a case of too little, too late. Where were you, Nicholas, when the rest of the media was fawning over the latest blurb/tweet of Trump and couldn't wait to break the news? No sir, the media helped create this mess, now you want a strategy for how to cover this 'charlatan'? Excuse this cynical Times reader and proud liberal but I'm sensing that your article is an attempt to cover your tracks and the fact that you were a part of this rise of the fascist. Why wasn't this written weeks, months ago? Because it was too much fun and you didn't take him seriously. Admit it and then we can get strategic.
6
It's already too late to decide how. That decision has been made and acted on by the mainstream media for months. Mr. Trump says something - anything, no matter how wrong, stubborn, stupid, or offensive - and all the microphones and cameras and typewriters are on him. You, Media Empire, have become his PR department and he knows it. And uses you well.
This so-called "debate" will be no debate at all. It will be a shill act for publicity.
This so-called "debate" will be no debate at all. It will be a shill act for publicity.
8
A bit late to wake up and smell the coffee. After Iraq, after 8 years of Bush, after the financial crisis, after Trump's rise, now 6 weeks before the election you want to start calling a spade a spade? Education is not like flipping a switch.
20
An active role by moderators to counter Trump's assertions could focus the event upon keeping Trump in line. This is again a disservice to Hillary, distracting viewers from her and pushing them to consider Trump, Trump, Trump again.
What is important that Hillary be given the opportunity to present herself, her skill, her optimism, her enthusiasm, and just leave Trump to play in his own sandbox, trading with his kids, building sand castles alone.
What is important that Hillary be given the opportunity to present herself, her skill, her optimism, her enthusiasm, and just leave Trump to play in his own sandbox, trading with his kids, building sand castles alone.
8
Never in the history of this country has the biblical phrase, "the truth shall set you free", been so applicable and so palpable.
Any halfway intelligent person who examined the facts could see that there was no conclusive evidence that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. Yet the supposedly super smart Hillary voted for war. The leader of the Democrats in Congress, Pelosi, proclaims she supports a bill she hasn't read! Hillary and Bill deregulate banks and refuse to regulate derivatives and as a result the economy goes up in smoke. Hillary supports NAFTA even though there are well thought out warnings that it will destroy American jobs. Bill and Hillary become wealthy even though they never build a thing or create a product, but just spend their careers being public servants. The joke is you overlook these grievous transgressions and call Trump a liar so call him unfit to be President. Well, it is not your decision. It is up to the American people.
This is an attempt lime the one Trump used to stick Hillary with Trumps "birther" smear of Obama.
That vote was for a continued presence of US troops near Iraq, so that the weapons inspectors could continue, but not an attack. Get your facts straight before writing wrong statements.
That vote was for a continued presence of US troops near Iraq, so that the weapons inspectors could continue, but not an attack. Get your facts straight before writing wrong statements.
1
Your grabbing claims against Clinton from decades of public service -- and even prior to her first public service job as Senator. And you even twist the truth on some of these, like, "Hillary supports NAFTA even though there are well thought out warnings that it will destroy American jobs." There are obvious issues with this. First, results show NAFTA has not harmed US
employment. Second, your claim is in the present tense, when NAFTA has been in effect for over 13 years! In fact, it appears that you copied and pasted this from a 1993 statement.
Try again, and try harder, and truth to be truthful this time.
employment. Second, your claim is in the present tense, when NAFTA has been in effect for over 13 years! In fact, it appears that you copied and pasted this from a 1993 statement.
Try again, and try harder, and truth to be truthful this time.
1
Hey Marie what about the CIA pushing knowingly false Intel about WMD and yellow cake at Bush/Cheney's request. Any "halfway intelligent" legislator would have unfortunately taken them at their word.
Hindsight is always 20/20 isn't it.
Hindsight is always 20/20 isn't it.
1
Well, thanks, Mr. Kristoff, for finally showing some courage about the cravenness of the national media, including yourself, of course, in not calling out Trump, as a pathological liar and a sociopath, what he so clearly demonstrated that is, at least almost a year ago.
3
Hello, yourself. Many Americans? Don’t exaggerate. Very few say Clinton is LESS HONEST than Trump. That would be absurd, even if they don't trust or like her. Trump’s fans say he isn’t afraid to say what he thinks---for many that’s his main attraction. But they never analyze what it IS he thinks.
Of course there’s no comparison. If being better than Trump is the main virtue of any candidate, then the country is in big trouble. And I guess it is.
But many Americans agree that this is the worst media campaign coverage of any election in memory. There’s just no comparison with past campaigns. coverage. To America’s shame before the world, our elongated, multi billion campaigns are side show entertainments geared to a teenaged mentality.
We might learn the methods of civilized, modern countries, since contrasting examples are eye openers. Mr. Kristof, you’re a world traveler and reporter----do some comparisons in your next column, in funding and in media coverage abroad, to show the contrast with our Reality TV show wasting multi billions, increasing with each election.
Of course there’s no comparison. If being better than Trump is the main virtue of any candidate, then the country is in big trouble. And I guess it is.
But many Americans agree that this is the worst media campaign coverage of any election in memory. There’s just no comparison with past campaigns. coverage. To America’s shame before the world, our elongated, multi billion campaigns are side show entertainments geared to a teenaged mentality.
We might learn the methods of civilized, modern countries, since contrasting examples are eye openers. Mr. Kristof, you’re a world traveler and reporter----do some comparisons in your next column, in funding and in media coverage abroad, to show the contrast with our Reality TV show wasting multi billions, increasing with each election.
8
Great to finally read that some truth-seeking journalists are willing to call a duck a duck. Traditional journalism in election politics may be fine when the candidates are both expressing reasonable truthfulness, but this is not the case in the 2016 Presidential campaign; as noted in your article, the two candidates are not equivalent in this regard. You're correct: journalism should remember Iraq; complex matters of importance are not well served by stenography; and this lesson must be applied to this Presidential campaign. The media's principal goal must be to protect the public interest by keeping the public truthfully informed, and when that interest is threatened by recurring statements of disinformation, evasiveness or lies, the media must shine a bright light on such actions by telling the public what is going on, clearly and loudly. This is not rocket science; it's simply good journalism.
199
Trump is not a Teflon candidate by any means. He is a pandering,defies answering any follow up. He needs to be stopped in his tracks. No out but answer the question. For example,not he is going to invite Gen nicer Flowers to the debate, why isn't Jane Doe invited from the law suit of under age prostitutes being invited? Innuendo versus Innuendo.
2
Thank you Nicholas for your writing and your decency and goodness.
I regularly think of the 1957 Elia Kazan movie "A Face in the Crowd" about a charming entertainer who gains enormous power over his audience as he moves toward the abuse of political power. It is so prescient regarding the blurring of entertainment and politics as was "Network". It is a must see in this crazy season.
I regularly think of the 1957 Elia Kazan movie "A Face in the Crowd" about a charming entertainer who gains enormous power over his audience as he moves toward the abuse of political power. It is so prescient regarding the blurring of entertainment and politics as was "Network". It is a must see in this crazy season.
4
In my dreams last night, the sonorous Voice of the true spirit of the United States visited me.
Write a letter, The Voice boomed, that will save the nation.
That’s a mighty tall order.
Yes.
But…
No buts. Don’t dawdle, falter, doubt, or fear. Now is not the time.
Alright, then, I’ll do it.
In your letter, invoke the spirits of Douglass, Whitman, Anzaldua, Tsui.
Right.
In the dream, Donald Trump, pistols on both hips, a hand grenade hanging from each ear lobe, an AK-47 in his teeth, is a minotaur. He is riding the nation bareback towards the precipice of Niagara Falls. He calls it Viagra Falls. TV screens everywhere. Trump watches himself; combs his hair.
As Trump and The Nation near the terrifying drop, millions of people watch aghast. They start shouting. NO. NEVER. Louder than an atomic bomb. Then they pull voting levers forged from civic pride.
The Nation bucks minotaur Trump off. He goes headlong over the falls. As he plummets over the edge, Tarzan ululations. After a long, long fall, a tiny splash, the end. All the long way down, his last words: vindiction, the holy enchilada, lazy fairy, oils of snake.
The collective exhalation is so strong, The Nation halts at the precipice, reverses direction, heads upstream against the mighty flow. The cheering multitudes clutch The Nation to their bosom.
Bill Murray, the Dream Bartender, makes everybody, so shaken and stirred, Depth- Finders. For finding your depth, he says.
Yours truly,
Hugh Mohr Ali
Write a letter, The Voice boomed, that will save the nation.
That’s a mighty tall order.
Yes.
But…
No buts. Don’t dawdle, falter, doubt, or fear. Now is not the time.
Alright, then, I’ll do it.
In your letter, invoke the spirits of Douglass, Whitman, Anzaldua, Tsui.
Right.
In the dream, Donald Trump, pistols on both hips, a hand grenade hanging from each ear lobe, an AK-47 in his teeth, is a minotaur. He is riding the nation bareback towards the precipice of Niagara Falls. He calls it Viagra Falls. TV screens everywhere. Trump watches himself; combs his hair.
As Trump and The Nation near the terrifying drop, millions of people watch aghast. They start shouting. NO. NEVER. Louder than an atomic bomb. Then they pull voting levers forged from civic pride.
The Nation bucks minotaur Trump off. He goes headlong over the falls. As he plummets over the edge, Tarzan ululations. After a long, long fall, a tiny splash, the end. All the long way down, his last words: vindiction, the holy enchilada, lazy fairy, oils of snake.
The collective exhalation is so strong, The Nation halts at the precipice, reverses direction, heads upstream against the mighty flow. The cheering multitudes clutch The Nation to their bosom.
Bill Murray, the Dream Bartender, makes everybody, so shaken and stirred, Depth- Finders. For finding your depth, he says.
Yours truly,
Hugh Mohr Ali
3
Trump reminds me of Joffrey Baratheon in GOT. He waves his new Valarian steel sword around and makes boasts about what he'll slice up his enemies, yet when faced with the Battle of the Blackwater, turns tail and runs, abandoning his men.
Yes, Game of Thrones is fiction, and Jack Gleeson is nothing like the character he played, but Donald Trump has shown again and again that he's a prototypical bully--tough-talking but quick to run from a real challenge.
Yes, Game of Thrones is fiction, and Jack Gleeson is nothing like the character he played, but Donald Trump has shown again and again that he's a prototypical bully--tough-talking but quick to run from a real challenge.
1
The real problem is the shallowness of our public discourse, where every encounter with the public, whether it be a debate, a speech, or an interview, is so brief. Short time limits in all these venues causes superficialness. (If that's what the public wants, then we also have a cultural and/or education problem too.) Candidates are asked to cover very complex and serious topics in mere minutes if not seconds. Thus candidates like Trump who have a short attention span, and/or don't have public policy chops, and/or have wacky ideas that wouldn't stand up to any type of in-depth analysis, can get away with sounding like serious people (to paraphrase Paul Krugman). Journalists can call out the Trumps of the world for lies and ridiculousness, but the Trumps of the world will still thrive in an environment that engenders shallowness over depth, rhetoric over substance, and impressions over facts.
8
The nation is in mortal danger, and we get this?
Trump is an existential threat to the republic and the rest of the world. His statements are in his mind the moderate expressions of what he will do. They are the efforts at compromise and reconciliation. The real Trump will become evident in January. He's a fascist for godsake. Wake up.
Trump is an existential threat to the republic and the rest of the world. His statements are in his mind the moderate expressions of what he will do. They are the efforts at compromise and reconciliation. The real Trump will become evident in January. He's a fascist for godsake. Wake up.
12
This is journalism as it should be.
4
Why will Nicholas Kristof's admonitions remain unheeded?
Because the first priority of any newspaper is to sell advertising space, not save humanity from itself, just as a TV station's first duty is to sell air-time to advertisers, and then whatever is printed or broadcast can bait readers/listeners to tune in. That is reality, and the rest is illusion.
Trump's outlandish career improves media ratings, and by extension, advertising income. A Trump presidency would be a financial bonanza for news services since the entire world would be breathlessly anxious and tuned in to the 'news services' around the clock to witness the latest apocalypse created by the 21st century's answer to Caligula.
News anchors are hired first and foremost for their looks, and then for whatever tiny speck of ability they can cultivate sufficient to read from a teleprompter. Matt Lauer personifies the typical media talking-head as demonstrated last week, and that sort of performance profits him $20 million a year. Imagine that.
Because the first priority of any newspaper is to sell advertising space, not save humanity from itself, just as a TV station's first duty is to sell air-time to advertisers, and then whatever is printed or broadcast can bait readers/listeners to tune in. That is reality, and the rest is illusion.
Trump's outlandish career improves media ratings, and by extension, advertising income. A Trump presidency would be a financial bonanza for news services since the entire world would be breathlessly anxious and tuned in to the 'news services' around the clock to witness the latest apocalypse created by the 21st century's answer to Caligula.
News anchors are hired first and foremost for their looks, and then for whatever tiny speck of ability they can cultivate sufficient to read from a teleprompter. Matt Lauer personifies the typical media talking-head as demonstrated last week, and that sort of performance profits him $20 million a year. Imagine that.
5
The fact of the matter is the DNC was bent since 2008 to elect Hillary. They fielded a group of 4 -less than mediocre- candidates until one independent Bernie stood out above all with messages of reform and anti-establishment politics. He was quickly dispatched and marginalized by the DNC so Hillary would have an unimpeded path to the Oval Office. The Democratic party has a trove of qualified candidates in the wings- yet we were forced fed Hillary. That is not a democratic way to elect a President. Trump, for all his faults and we know there are many- beat 16 other contenders. Win or lose he legitimately earned his spot. Hillary's spot was gift wrapped by power broker lobbies and back scratching politicians- and they will want something in return. Hillary will tend to their needs at the expense of the average American voters. This is the rigged travesty of our electoral process. Trump may be a Charlatan, but he is there fair and square- and that's more than I can say for Hillary.
2
Fair and square is an odd choice of words for the insult fest that was the Republican primary process. Hillary has been working with the Democratic establishment for twenty years. That's smart, not sleazy. It's political calculus. National politicians need allies and surrogates, and a Democrat looks for those at the DNC. Clinton beat Bernie by every measure we have in a democratic process. Primary voters. Pledged delegates. Superdelegates. Endorsements. Nothing was unseemly but Sanders' late game strategy to try and persuade superdelegates to vote against the clear will of the Democratic primary voter.
Trump University, Trump Foundation, Trump businesses, etc., etc., were information available during the Republican primaries: where was the press?
22
Trump is a "Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire"...!!!
1
The debate must have timed answers, with the microphones silenced after the time allowance.
Of course, Trump will override this, by making juvenile faces with eye rolls and petulant lip pursing, etc.
Judge Judy said that Trump should "start acting presidential", which is a lot different than being presidential.
Of course, Trump will override this, by making juvenile faces with eye rolls and petulant lip pursing, etc.
Judge Judy said that Trump should "start acting presidential", which is a lot different than being presidential.
2
Donald Trump is as sincere as a cobra and wants to be president to fulfill his giant ego deficit. He changes his mind every day because he tells his changing audiences what they want to hear. It's a very cynical ploy, exploiting the fears and ignorance of people for political gain. I find it very irritating when I hear Trump supporters say, "He tells it like it is." No, Trump tells it like it isn't but they are too intellectually lazy to seek the facts or
maybe they think like Alfred E. Neuman, who said, "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts." Another cliché we hear from Trump's followers: "He's one of us." God forbid that so many people identify with
the morally bankrupt Trump, who makes fun of disabled people, lies constantly, trashes American military heroes and their families, labels Mexicans rapists and calls for the murder of the families, including children, of terrorists. In spite of all this, the news media, especially CNN and cable news, continue to present a lopsided view of the presidential race in favor of Trump, as if it was normal.
maybe they think like Alfred E. Neuman, who said, "My mind is made up, don't confuse me with the facts." Another cliché we hear from Trump's followers: "He's one of us." God forbid that so many people identify with
the morally bankrupt Trump, who makes fun of disabled people, lies constantly, trashes American military heroes and their families, labels Mexicans rapists and calls for the murder of the families, including children, of terrorists. In spite of all this, the news media, especially CNN and cable news, continue to present a lopsided view of the presidential race in favor of Trump, as if it was normal.
13
Get out more, Iconoclast. (Though Mingling Iconoclast might make a good oxymoron.) Listen to the people up here where I am and all over our sad nation. They most definitely are like Trump. They are people with the lowest levels of functioning intelligence; they have few morals, because morals require understanding they aren't capable of; they boil with hate for the world they can't belong to.
Trump's followers are those horrid kids we suffered in kindergarten who broke the toy rather than share it with us.
Trump's followers are those horrid kids we suffered in kindergarten who broke the toy rather than share it with us.
This is no time to stand on the sidelines and debate what journalism should or should not be. Journalists who know he is a charlatan need to take action to stop him. Trump is using powerful rhetorical tools to make monkeys of the opposition, when it is he who is the monkey, or the chimpanzee actually. Then he promises to lock them up. He could actually win this election and, if that happens, God knows what will become of this fragile experiment of democracy.
2
It does not matter to a certain percentage of voters that Trump lies daily, about things big and small. They think he will help them.
2
These are the same folks who buy lottery tickets because they don't have retirement savings. 56% of Americans have less than $10K saved for retirement (Money Magazine, March 2016). Their willful blindness to the economic facts of life, and falling in love with the fantasy that Trump speaks for them and that only he can fix their lives ... Well, we've seen this before. In Oz. Except that charlatan had a good heart. This one is a whole basket of deplorables all by his lonesome.
Journalists need to remind us that people that support fascists are complicit.
Can we really sit in the seats and scream " mutilate the castratrating feminazi lawyers"?
Or accuse the secretary of State of out thin blue air, of treason, use the term rapist like pick pocket or accuse Pres. Bush of being a perpetrator of the highest crimes and activities parallel with the death penalty.
Our media has done far more and far worse week after week at a volume and tempo that has made a 10 generation oozing scar in our our relationship with Fe.........I can't write another word...350 million people at stake
Can we really sit in the seats and scream " mutilate the castratrating feminazi lawyers"?
Or accuse the secretary of State of out thin blue air, of treason, use the term rapist like pick pocket or accuse Pres. Bush of being a perpetrator of the highest crimes and activities parallel with the death penalty.
Our media has done far more and far worse week after week at a volume and tempo that has made a 10 generation oozing scar in our our relationship with Fe.........I can't write another word...350 million people at stake
2
Hey Nicholas maybe the NYT reads your column! I read you first and AFTER that started on the front page and there was a front page near top of page article analyzing 31 Trump LIES [which as noted were not mistatements, jokes, etc.] GO NYT and thanks Kristof.
1
Too much of election coverage has been about the horse race or about the horses. Please compare policy proposals; for example, Trump's big tax cuts for the rich, Clinton's tax cuts for the Middle class.
1
Amen!
To those who think Ms. Clinton is not trustworthy, the term is relative. Mr. Trump tells one whopper after the next. After repeating the lies over and over, many have come to accept the lies as truth. But nothing could be further from the truth than Mr. Trump! His grasp of world events is scary, but admitting ignorance is not part of being Donald Trump. He would rather lie about something that he does not understand than to admit that he does not have a clue.
God help us if he becomes our next president!
To those who think Ms. Clinton is not trustworthy, the term is relative. Mr. Trump tells one whopper after the next. After repeating the lies over and over, many have come to accept the lies as truth. But nothing could be further from the truth than Mr. Trump! His grasp of world events is scary, but admitting ignorance is not part of being Donald Trump. He would rather lie about something that he does not understand than to admit that he does not have a clue.
God help us if he becomes our next president!
3
Where is George Orwell when you need him?
1
I felt the same nonchalance reading your article I felt when Trump admitted Obama was an American. Donald Trump has been telling outrageous and unbelievable lies for months and now that he is one election from the presidency of America, you write a column that should have written at least six months ago be every sensible and decent journalist. I am appalled.
2
A tiresomely ignorant column. Clinton got her start stealing $100,000 from commodity traders in the 1970s. (The fact that she is money hungry, needed the money and never did it again after so much "success" proves that her trader allocated the good trades to her and the bad trades to innocent victims.) She sicked the FBI on the totally innocent Billy Dale during the Travelgate affair. Additionally, of course, Clinton put her political ambitions ahead of the safety of American operatives abroad by placing her email on a private server. And, being Clinton, she lied about it after she was caught. She has destroyed about 15,000 emails that were on her server, and she expects people to believe she is telling the truth.
Somehow the Leftwing media thinks if they repeat over and over again that Clinton is not as bad as Trump that people will believe the lie. Clinton is 100% corrupt and dishonest, and the media despite its best efforts can't cover it up.
JD
Somehow the Leftwing media thinks if they repeat over and over again that Clinton is not as bad as Trump that people will believe the lie. Clinton is 100% corrupt and dishonest, and the media despite its best efforts can't cover it up.
JD
3
Hillary has been known to dissemble and shade the truth like any normal, mortal, politician. OTOH, Con Man Don does a veritable Gish Gallop (look it up...) of every kind of wrong. It’s impossible for anyone, be they professional journalist or average citizen, to keep up with all of his wrong, let alone address it. Don "The John" Trump operates by the dictum that it’s much easier to make a mess than it is to clean it up, and while others are distracted with the clean-up, and by him all the time shouting "Hey! Look over there! Hillary!," Mr. Despicable moves on to make even more messes. He's the King of Slimeballs, from a city that knows how to slimeball. Now, in addition to being King, he wants to be President?
9
Sadly, we have dropped into a world where words have little to no value and objective truth is viewed as an unnecessary convenience. In place of an idea of truth, we now accept the concept of "truthiness", which holds that anything that appears to have a resemblance to fact is close enough. If one looks deep enough one finds that this is the triumph of consumer capitalist culture: Anything that makes money is good, and anything that gets bought is its own justification by virtue of it having garnered a dollar. In its extreme blossoming this is Trump and his operating principle.
Churchill said that a lie will be half way around the world before truth has got its pants on, but this is not a valid reason to follow the sheep.
Churchill said that a lie will be half way around the world before truth has got its pants on, but this is not a valid reason to follow the sheep.
3
I have been trying to click on less Trump-related stories on NYT and many a days would avoid the front section of nytimes.com altogether. There has been more than enough coverage on this person, even as a Presidential candidate. Time to vote in November and live whatever the results may be.
1
I believe you are dead on in your column.
I oppose Trump with all my breath & will vote for Clinton -- who I trust to be reasonable and who I "can't stand" personally. [And who I think is a terrible campaigner. -- adding to my fears about any possible Trump success,]
I make these points because I think what you have described what is probably the ONLY way to legitimately expose the Trump "express."
I have Republican friends like the one another reader noted -- they have the "I don't like Hillary" flu & support certain Trump insanities without thinking them through or comprehending how much he just LIES!
I don't see it as violating journalistic integrity to report clearly & extensively with the accurate facts/questions about Trump's lies & inconsistencies. [After all & by the way the NYT headlined Wiener & his wife's separation/divorce as another "blow" to Clinton's campaign, which was pretty snarky & not very neutral to me {& remember I don't even like Clinton).]
Anyway, good for you & lets see more of what you suggest.
I oppose Trump with all my breath & will vote for Clinton -- who I trust to be reasonable and who I "can't stand" personally. [And who I think is a terrible campaigner. -- adding to my fears about any possible Trump success,]
I make these points because I think what you have described what is probably the ONLY way to legitimately expose the Trump "express."
I have Republican friends like the one another reader noted -- they have the "I don't like Hillary" flu & support certain Trump insanities without thinking them through or comprehending how much he just LIES!
I don't see it as violating journalistic integrity to report clearly & extensively with the accurate facts/questions about Trump's lies & inconsistencies. [After all & by the way the NYT headlined Wiener & his wife's separation/divorce as another "blow" to Clinton's campaign, which was pretty snarky & not very neutral to me {& remember I don't even like Clinton).]
Anyway, good for you & lets see more of what you suggest.
6
The media definitely has a hand in (a) selling Trump as an entertainment product and (b) failing to vet him as a candidate. Bad. Of course, had Trump been adequately demonstrated to be the liar and con-man early on, we might be looking at a contest between Ted Cruz and Hillary Clinton. Hard to say if that would be much of an improvement. One could say that Cruz definitely beats Trump in the brainpower department. But the late Justice Scalia was a very bright guy also... intellect doesn't help if the basic outlook is gonzo.
4
It would have helped if way back when this whole Trump campaign started you media folks hadn't reported his every utterance like it was straight from God's mouth. If you had ignored him, as he should have been ignored, he wouldn't have lasted through the first candidate debate. But, all the breathless scribbling down of every word of nonsense that fell from the man's lips, no matter how idiotic they were, made him into a media sensation, and here we are today. It's a little late to be soul searching now, wouldn't you say?
532
It's better than never.
However, how to make the truth stick to Trump is the challenge.
Thank you for telling it as it is.
However, how to make the truth stick to Trump is the challenge.
Thank you for telling it as it is.
Debate moderators, journalists, news show panelists and networks are all, more or less, responsible for promoting "entertainment" over substance. We may now be out of time when we hear at least one of the debate moderators say that his job is not fact checking!
The road has been paved for Trump. Wake up voters. We are sure to get the gov't we deserve for at least 4 years! I'm afraid that history of the late 1930s is about to repeat itself! Think about it!
The road has been paved for Trump. Wake up voters. We are sure to get the gov't we deserve for at least 4 years! I'm afraid that history of the late 1930s is about to repeat itself! Think about it!
A very old saying "fool me once, shame on me; fool me twice, shame on you "makes me believe there is going to be some very deep shame in this land if we continue to 'drink" the elixir sold daily by his honor the bankrupt billionaire.
Perhaps the reason only 6% of Americans say they trust the press is because they realize the so-called "even-handedness" in reporting is just a lazy - or self-protective - way of avoiding the need to function as real journalists and tell us the truth.
6
How do you solve a problem like the Donald?
How do you catch a toupée and pin it down?
How do you find the work permit of Melania??
A flibbertijibbet! A will-o'-the wisp! A clown!
(Extreme apologies to Rodgers and Hammerstein.)
How do you catch a toupée and pin it down?
How do you find the work permit of Melania??
A flibbertijibbet! A will-o'-the wisp! A clown!
(Extreme apologies to Rodgers and Hammerstein.)
3
Nice column but you are missing the most important point -
The problem is that we Times-types are talking about logic and facts - higher order thinking - while Trump is serving red meat directly to his constituency's hind brain. He's connecting directly with people who feel they are being denied their birthright. He's giving them just what they want to hear. In this context facts are irrelevant. This is not about logic; it is about fear and thwarted entitlement.
I don't know what might fix this except convincing those same section of our country that send so many of their children to defend our country that Trump is likely to get us all killed. Beyond that there isn't much to do besides make sure everyone else votes.
The problem is that we Times-types are talking about logic and facts - higher order thinking - while Trump is serving red meat directly to his constituency's hind brain. He's connecting directly with people who feel they are being denied their birthright. He's giving them just what they want to hear. In this context facts are irrelevant. This is not about logic; it is about fear and thwarted entitlement.
I don't know what might fix this except convincing those same section of our country that send so many of their children to defend our country that Trump is likely to get us all killed. Beyond that there isn't much to do besides make sure everyone else votes.
10
I have pointed people towards good news sources that showed the truth against lies only to be told that was a Liberal rag and we don't trust it. You can lead the horse to water but you cannot make him drink.
4
Horses have good instinct in that regard. You are sitting next to the horse, who won't touch the stuff, and you have no idea what you've just put into your own body.
1
journalism and in particular news is a profession whose very professionalism derives from honestly reporting of truth. the decline of truth in the press is due in part because of the lack of professionalism by so many.
6
Truth is a matter of life and death. A soldier who is mistakenly told an area is free of the enemy will end up with a bullet in the head. A commander who directs national energy and treasure to ward off an imaginary invasion - such as at our border with Mexixo - while neglecting a front of genuine danger - such as Russia - threatens the existence of the country. Somehow we have entered an age when truth is considered nothing more than a matter of opinion and a way to define team alliances: believe what I believe or you are on the other side.
I would like to see the debates start off with the question, "Do you value truth, and if so, what methodologies do you use to tell you when you are wrong about what is true?" The revealing aspect of the birther nonsense is that a presidential candidate has no means or desire to distinguish whether he believes something that is false, leading hsim to put a gray deal of energy in attempting to deny someone his civil rights. This is so dangerous: if he were president, he can claim that any American has similarly forged their birth certificate and deport them! Journalists need to post their objective methods of determining truth and adhere to them. Someone might criticize those methods, but at least journalists will have something they have defined as objectivity. That way they will not confuse objective truth methodologies with simply the need to give charlatans equal time with honest people like Hillary Clinton.
I would like to see the debates start off with the question, "Do you value truth, and if so, what methodologies do you use to tell you when you are wrong about what is true?" The revealing aspect of the birther nonsense is that a presidential candidate has no means or desire to distinguish whether he believes something that is false, leading hsim to put a gray deal of energy in attempting to deny someone his civil rights. This is so dangerous: if he were president, he can claim that any American has similarly forged their birth certificate and deport them! Journalists need to post their objective methods of determining truth and adhere to them. Someone might criticize those methods, but at least journalists will have something they have defined as objectivity. That way they will not confuse objective truth methodologies with simply the need to give charlatans equal time with honest people like Hillary Clinton.
3
It'salso interesting to note that Trump was mentored by Roy Cohen McCarthy's lawyer. Just keping the lies going.
3
Cohn, actually. Your, er, what is the polite term, oh yes, anti-Israel is showing.
Roy Cohn. Good point. Birds of a feather.
FINALLY. There is a lot of truth telling and remediating that needs to be done, and fast.
2
The media doesn't need to fact check. All the media needs to do is call out Trump on his racist, bigoted, misogynist statements. But the media don't seem willing to do that. They don't seem willing to pay attention to his scandals, and give his scandals barely a mention, while they harp on Hillary Clinton's e-mails, the Clinton Foundation and Benghazi. So here's a thought. Why don't you journalists stop harping on Hillary's e-mails and start asking why Trump hasn't been charged for HIS crimes? Lying, inciting foreign powers to spy on Americans, bribery of public officials...why isn't the media demanding that the DOJ investigate Trump and charge him for these crimes?
Or do you not care if the country falls into the hands of a sociopath? Better a sociopath who's a white male than a (shudder) WOMAN, is that it?
Or do you want to see the country go down in flames?
Or do you not care if the country falls into the hands of a sociopath? Better a sociopath who's a white male than a (shudder) WOMAN, is that it?
Or do you want to see the country go down in flames?
5
Any hint that the federal government was going after Trump would backfire big time. As it is, people are wondering why the IRS won't settle his audit.
Brusque, but to the point: if 62% of Americans still believe Obama was an immigrant, Trump is a shoo-in. I am afraid responsible journalism is a day late and a dollar short; I commend the author on his brave stance.
5
Please re-read the column. It says 62% believe he was born in the US.
What a quandary Mr. Kristof. You want to sway the election, and still pretend you are an objective journalist. I suggest you go all in for Hillary Clinton - and tell it like you see it. You will find that you and your NYT colleagues long ago sacrificed all credibility for cheap political points that will seem inconsequential after President Trump steps inside the Oval Office. No one will care what you say except those already on your side.
2
Ambrose: why? Because President Trump will revise all libel laws? Do you even know what that statement sounds like and how scary that is, in light of 20th century history?
1
"In the debate about invading Iraq, news organizations scrupulously quoted each side but didn’t adequately signal what was obvious to anyone reporting in the region: that we would be welcomed in Iraq not with flowers but with bombs. In our effort to avoid partisanship, we let our country down." I appreciate the understatement in those last five words. As an ordinary citizen who has lived overseas for 27 of my 60+ years, I knew that what GWB, Rummy, and Cheney were saying was total baloney - and I have been proved right repeatedly on this issue. Many folk believe that the Iraq invasion of 2003 was the single biggest foreign policy blunder of our entire history.
"When some in cable TV cover Trump endlessly without sufficiently fact-checking his statements or noting how extreme his positions are, because he is great for ratings and makes money for media companies, we are again failing the country. We are normalizing lies and extremism." This is also true but leaves out an important consideration: the Constitution names the press (media) as a necessary important check-and-balance against the abuse of power. Since the media that a huge majority of people actually see is now more than 90% controlled by giant corporations, the role of government watchdog and check against political corruption has been largely set aside. Those huge corporations and their lobbyists are the *prime* movers with whom corrupt incumbents are in bed. Just take a look at who is paying taxes and who is not!
"When some in cable TV cover Trump endlessly without sufficiently fact-checking his statements or noting how extreme his positions are, because he is great for ratings and makes money for media companies, we are again failing the country. We are normalizing lies and extremism." This is also true but leaves out an important consideration: the Constitution names the press (media) as a necessary important check-and-balance against the abuse of power. Since the media that a huge majority of people actually see is now more than 90% controlled by giant corporations, the role of government watchdog and check against political corruption has been largely set aside. Those huge corporations and their lobbyists are the *prime* movers with whom corrupt incumbents are in bed. Just take a look at who is paying taxes and who is not!
13
The truth is out there somewhere, and it will take a concerted effort to report it in the maelstrom of Mr. Trump's false equivalencies, distortions and outright lies. It is the duty of the Fourth Estate to speak truth to power and to define the issues so that common voters can make informed choices. The Democratic Party has proven incapable over the past 30 years of framing arguments to suite their purpose, while the GOP has been adept at defining the issues and setting the perimeters of debate to better peddle their own platform. But it is still lipstick on the same old Trump elephant.
Note that the press laid low and played dead until Sen. Joe McCarthy eventually went too far in his quest for power. I'm sure that there are thousands of journalists with the moral courage of Edward R. Murrow. It is now their time for them and their corporate masters to stand up and be counted.
Note that the press laid low and played dead until Sen. Joe McCarthy eventually went too far in his quest for power. I'm sure that there are thousands of journalists with the moral courage of Edward R. Murrow. It is now their time for them and their corporate masters to stand up and be counted.
8
That's actually not true. There were quite a few opponents of McCarthy from his election in '46 on and even before then in Wisconsin.
Well said. Now let’s have some good reporting in the rest of the NYT and other media outlets!
America is a unique country in that it is okay to publish the truth, let's not waste that privilege by electing someone who might well take away that right. Surly I don’t need to remind you journalists that Trump vowed to loosen libel laws so that he (and his ilk) can more easily sue the media.
America is a unique country in that it is okay to publish the truth, let's not waste that privilege by electing someone who might well take away that right. Surly I don’t need to remind you journalists that Trump vowed to loosen libel laws so that he (and his ilk) can more easily sue the media.
8
Add to the media soup the terrible TV news coverage, and the biases of newscasters who are given so much air time. Please don't forget Melania's grade-school rip off of Michelle Obama's 2008 speech. It's all stealth and lies, folks, like a bad romance. From these distant islands (Aotearoa, New Zealand) in the South Pacific, it is hard to understand how a nation has been so wooed.
Nell, Auckland
Nell, Auckland
8
What America needs at this moment is another Edward R. Murrow.
9
Why, yes, Mr. Kristof, I do believe that you "in the media were [are] greasing the skids to a bad outcome for our country." What will it take to get real coverage--not he said/she said--of this vicious clown Trump? (I grew up in New York, and I know a clown when I see one. Bigly.) May be too late now, dears.
Actually, I think "the media," with some honorable exceptions, have been blowing off their responsibilities since at least Ronald ("there was no race problem in America when I was a little boy") Reagan, if not Nixon. I wasn't around for McCarthy and can't criticize, though I've heard tales.
Speaking of McCarthy, wasn't Roy Cohn an advisor to the young, impressionable, me-me-me Donald J. Trump? Another poisoned apple tree that the Republican candidate--I'm talking to you, "party of Lincoln"--hasn't fallen far from.
Actually, I think "the media," with some honorable exceptions, have been blowing off their responsibilities since at least Ronald ("there was no race problem in America when I was a little boy") Reagan, if not Nixon. I wasn't around for McCarthy and can't criticize, though I've heard tales.
Speaking of McCarthy, wasn't Roy Cohn an advisor to the young, impressionable, me-me-me Donald J. Trump? Another poisoned apple tree that the Republican candidate--I'm talking to you, "party of Lincoln"--hasn't fallen far from.
7
: In war, truth is the first casualty. Aeschylus said. I do not think it an exaggeration to say that truth is the first casualty in 2016 American politics. I fear Lester Holt will be like the little Dutch boy with his finger in the dike trying to prevent Trump's flood of lies from inundating us all.
4
Thank you for this column. Yes, the media has been letting us down since at least the period when the Iraq war was being forced upon us and the rest of the world, not to mention the 2000 election when very few questioned G. W. Bush's competence.
I hope this piece by the highly respected Nicholas Kristof will inspire more courage among his colleagues to once again assume their traditional role as watchdog for the American people.
I have often wondered, during these years of a lapsed responsibility, what Edward R. Murrow would say, were he here. He died more than 50 years ago, yet he remains the standard of journalistic integrity.
There is still time for reporters to do the kind of work he did -- report what they know, especially if it makes us uncomfortable.
The American people respect courage. In this crucial time in our history, they need it, both in their leaders and in those who write about them.
I hope this piece by the highly respected Nicholas Kristof will inspire more courage among his colleagues to once again assume their traditional role as watchdog for the American people.
I have often wondered, during these years of a lapsed responsibility, what Edward R. Murrow would say, were he here. He died more than 50 years ago, yet he remains the standard of journalistic integrity.
There is still time for reporters to do the kind of work he did -- report what they know, especially if it makes us uncomfortable.
The American people respect courage. In this crucial time in our history, they need it, both in their leaders and in those who write about them.
326
There are many reporters who are courageous and would print what they know even if it makes them and us uncomfortable but it's the newspaper and network owners and the stockholders who control what's printed and reported. We need publishers and network bosses who also are courageous and will stand up to those who "hold the purse strings" and print or say what needs to be said, whatever the cost. If Donald Trump is ultimately elected president, we only have ourselves to blame because a majority of the American people voted for him.
1
Along with Edw. R. Murrow let's also praise Walter Cronkite, A.J. Liebling, and all the great investigative people like Jane Mayer, Robert Scheer and so many, many others who risked their careers working against the fears of so many owners that telling the truth might damage the business of journalism.
1
Charles Blow has been telling t;he truth about Trump for months to no avail it seems. He is accused of being biased and worse "boring" in these very comment sections by many readers of the Times. I wonder how this would play out in local papers and general magazines like People. The American people may be getting exactly what they desire I am afraid and what they deserve.
More than 20 years of relentless smearing of Hillary Clinton has resulted in a segment of U.S. voters enured to fact. She must justify every action in her life since college while Trump isn't expected to take responsibility for what he said five minutes ago. It would be a funny high school election comedy - the clueless braggart vs the studious nerd - if the results weren't so dire.
19
I agree, but rather late, don't you think?
The story of the press is rather the opposite of the story of the 'boy who cried wolf.' The press has for so long failed to clearly cry "wolf" on Trump for so long, that many people no longer trust the press when it does.
The rest of us knew it all along, and were frustrated with the press' equivocations.
The story of the press is rather the opposite of the story of the 'boy who cried wolf.' The press has for so long failed to clearly cry "wolf" on Trump for so long, that many people no longer trust the press when it does.
The rest of us knew it all along, and were frustrated with the press' equivocations.
8
get politifact to moderate the debates,
scroll rebuttals to lies on the screen bottom as they come out in real time.
The scroll lines would get larger and larger as more lies were told without recant until the screen covered the candidates face and voice.
he would always have the option of rebutting the rebuttal to get screen space back. But with no recant no space.
scroll rebuttals to lies on the screen bottom as they come out in real time.
The scroll lines would get larger and larger as more lies were told without recant until the screen covered the candidates face and voice.
he would always have the option of rebutting the rebuttal to get screen space back. But with no recant no space.
5
From my point of view, this Presidential campaign was over when it became official during the primaries that Bernie Sanders was out. Actually, I had dismissed Donald Trump as a charlatan long before that.
Over the years, I have noticed that more and more, the news media, especially since the advent of electronic formats, has had a harder and harder time differentiating itself from Pop Culture. Eventually I suppose it needed to examine itself and question if this shift was indeed serving the best interest of the public. I suppose it is telling of the human condition that things had to get as bad as they are now for this self examination to begin. I sincerely hope though, that for all of our sakes, this is the beginning of a needed shift that will right our dangerously listing ship and that from now on we will see the media sincerely helping us to examine the facts and encourage us all to vote.
Over the years, I have noticed that more and more, the news media, especially since the advent of electronic formats, has had a harder and harder time differentiating itself from Pop Culture. Eventually I suppose it needed to examine itself and question if this shift was indeed serving the best interest of the public. I suppose it is telling of the human condition that things had to get as bad as they are now for this self examination to begin. I sincerely hope though, that for all of our sakes, this is the beginning of a needed shift that will right our dangerously listing ship and that from now on we will see the media sincerely helping us to examine the facts and encourage us all to vote.
4
Evenhandedness of the Press is vital under normal or debatable circumstances so that readers and viewers can make objective/subjective opinions. But it can be a disservice like the bipartisanship displayed for a wrong war. A charlatan is a charlatan even if he is a Presidential Candidate. In this Presidential Cycle this evenhandedness has resulted in false equivalencies. A truth stretched is not in the same league as an outright, outrageous lie. I hope Lester Holt will take some notes from Candie Crowley.
4
The role of the press in a free society is exactly what Mr. Kristof suggests here -- to police the claims of those in power, and to bring other points of view to light when they are not popular or not held by those in authority. Mr. Trump already wields great authority; his words launch 1000 tweets. Let us hope that he will not be given authority to launch missiles.
4
"Yet I can see how the endless media coverage of Clinton’s email evasiveness might incline some casual voters to perceive Trump as the more honest figure".
Casual voters? I politely call them willfully ignorant and if there are enough of them out there that Trump wins, they will deserve him. In the mean time, I am looking into countries where I can become an ex-pat.
Casual voters? I politely call them willfully ignorant and if there are enough of them out there that Trump wins, they will deserve him. In the mean time, I am looking into countries where I can become an ex-pat.
4
It's not that difficult. If news reporters would confine themselves to reporting NEWS, then every time that Donald Trump attacks Hilary Clinton, that's not news. It's old hat; he's done it before. If reporters limit themselves to reporting only when a candidate says something that is "newsworthy"---a position on an issue, a new thought, etc.-- and not just anything that pops out of the candidate's mouth, Donald Trump would find himself getting a lot less coverage, simply because he does little other than repeat the same old lies.
5
I have stopped watching CNN these days. It has become like a PR service for Trump's lies and ugly posturizing, without any news except Trump's wild-and- crazy bamboozling.
As George Orwell wrote about language...: is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity
to pure wind.
As George Orwell wrote about language...: is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectable, and to give an appearance of solidity
to pure wind.
Ha, a little late for steno's in this game. It is less steno than sensationalizing the news for making money and gaining readers and watchers. It is a foolish game to play with the public as we have become the losers.
3
It is simply not the function of a moderator to challenge a debater's statements; that's the job of the opponent. Monday's debate is no time for the news media, even the respectable news media, to seek absolution for its sin of false equivalence by way of a moderator cum prosecuting attorney.
I am well aware that inasmuch as Clinton has been on the wrong side of just about every important issue over the last twenty-some years -- crime, welfare, NAFTA, financial reform, AUMF, Iraq War, Libya, TPP -- she would wind up spending most of her time defending herself if she tried to go head-to-toe with Trump. But asking the moderator to do what she can't will make her look weak and will garner sympathy for Trump.
I am well aware that inasmuch as Clinton has been on the wrong side of just about every important issue over the last twenty-some years -- crime, welfare, NAFTA, financial reform, AUMF, Iraq War, Libya, TPP -- she would wind up spending most of her time defending herself if she tried to go head-to-toe with Trump. But asking the moderator to do what she can't will make her look weak and will garner sympathy for Trump.
Well said. The time for truth telling is now...or else, the unmasking of a liar accustomed to cheat on journalists and get away with it. Not this time, famous last words. We, the public, shall keep your feet to the fire this time, so that ignominious Trump, the Liar-in-chief, can be revealed as the fraud he is (the wizard of Oz squared!). No more "reality TV" please, we have enough problems in the real world...to have to tolerate this villainous 'clown' telling us sick jokes for true stories.
2
Nicholas Kristof asks, "How to cover a charlatan like Trump". Simple: cover Trump the way you cover other charlatans. Examples:
The charlatan Bill Clinton, who said NAFTA would bring jobs to the USA....without mentioning that the jobs brought to the USA would be small in number, on Wall Street and at ports bringing imports into the USA, and that a million or more jobs would be lost across the country.
The charlatan Barack Obama, who said, "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor", and who sent Susan Rice (as a sacrificial lamb?) to test the waters on calling the 9/11/12 attack on Benghazi were spontaneous and caused by a video.
The charlatan Hillary Clinton, who said that the Benghazi attacks on Sept. 11, 2012, began “spontaneously” in response to an anti-Muslim video on the internet, but who emailed the truth to her daughter.
You could also cover charlatans in the media such as Ezra Klein, the leader of JournOlist, the infamous group comprising many 'reporters' who decided to call anyone who disagreed with the policies of President Obama a racist.
It's really pretty simple: just tell the truth. And perhaps, over time, the American people might come to trust the news media a bit more than we trust used car salesmen.
The charlatan Bill Clinton, who said NAFTA would bring jobs to the USA....without mentioning that the jobs brought to the USA would be small in number, on Wall Street and at ports bringing imports into the USA, and that a million or more jobs would be lost across the country.
The charlatan Barack Obama, who said, "If you like your doctor, you can keep your doctor", and who sent Susan Rice (as a sacrificial lamb?) to test the waters on calling the 9/11/12 attack on Benghazi were spontaneous and caused by a video.
The charlatan Hillary Clinton, who said that the Benghazi attacks on Sept. 11, 2012, began “spontaneously” in response to an anti-Muslim video on the internet, but who emailed the truth to her daughter.
You could also cover charlatans in the media such as Ezra Klein, the leader of JournOlist, the infamous group comprising many 'reporters' who decided to call anyone who disagreed with the policies of President Obama a racist.
It's really pretty simple: just tell the truth. And perhaps, over time, the American people might come to trust the news media a bit more than we trust used car salesmen.
3
Unfortunately, it is already a little too late as the narratives about Trump and Clinton are fairly well baked in. The media and journalists cannot rescue themselves from their bad reporting behavior by acknowledging these issues at this late stage. Their practices have led to a surprisingly tight race in a case where it should be no contest. Perhaps accurate and thoughtful reporting at this late stage will sway a few last minute undecided voters, but the media has made this a much closer contest than it ever deserved to be.
7
Mr. Kristof, thank you for coming out of the journalistic closet! Others seem to be doing likewise - better late than never! Now I hope that legal and journalistic attention and action is rapidly forthcoming regarding Trump University - it is much more important than Hillary's emails! If Trump could be convicted of a felony, then of course he could be "impeached" if the Trumpers vote him in! We surely need a contingency plan! A Trump presidency is unthinkable!
4
The digital age has caused traditional media to capitulate the traditions of a free press in favour of ratings. Trump could have been called out early but the money men loved the circus.
Now looking the other way is frightening.
The lame in lame stream media in this case is the lame excuses by those who allowed the circus to have held over performances.
I am sure the founders did not anticipate that the free press could be so easily bought
Now looking the other way is frightening.
The lame in lame stream media in this case is the lame excuses by those who allowed the circus to have held over performances.
I am sure the founders did not anticipate that the free press could be so easily bought
3
I fault the Times not only in giving Trump a microphone through multiple articles but also when writing that voters don't "trust" Hillary. What voters are those? Those who listen to Fox News? Turning that lack of "trust" into a meme is what's causing many young people, who don't know how important and admired Clinton was in the 90s (by liberals).
In addition, there was very little positive coverage on Bernie Sanderrs in the beginning. He was not seen by your paper as a serious candidate when in fact, we needed SOMEONE to prevent another Clinton presidency. I felt the Bern but will vote for Hillary. She's definitely the better candidate and will continue the great work that President Obama has done.
Lastly, stop with the fawning Maureen Dowd articles describing "sleepy" Trump as if they were both in the room together in the morning.
In addition, there was very little positive coverage on Bernie Sanderrs in the beginning. He was not seen by your paper as a serious candidate when in fact, we needed SOMEONE to prevent another Clinton presidency. I felt the Bern but will vote for Hillary. She's definitely the better candidate and will continue the great work that President Obama has done.
Lastly, stop with the fawning Maureen Dowd articles describing "sleepy" Trump as if they were both in the room together in the morning.
38
Bernie's people are always whining. They sound like Trump's people: It's never the candidate, it the New York Times!
"I fault the Times not only in giving Trump a microphone through multiple articles but also when writing that voters don't "trust" Hillary. What voters are those? Those who listen to Fox News? Turning that lack of "trust" into a meme is what's causing many young people, who don't know how important and admired Clinton was in the 90s (by liberals)" Amen.
But Trump did show us how to lose 25 pounds. Just lie about your weight to Dr. Oz on national television.
25
Yes! And at a time of life when most people have finished growing, the GOP nominee has grown a full inch -- from 6'2" to 6'3" -- and, coincidently, that means having a BMI of "overweight" instead of "obese."
The physical weight of this man is the least of our worries. It is the indigestible political regimen that we may experience that may cause some of us to blow-up, or shrink. Shrink as the greatest Nation on Earth, shrink as Americans. It is happening already. Some of us now retired have wisely gone back to their roots.
When a supporter of this political hopeful was here the other day, telling me that we had better vote for him, or trouble would lie ahead, it was tempting to mention that the guards of concentration camps were detected because they did not look starved, and this would have been in 'poor taste', one of the multiple reasons we are so divided.
The Times is doing better than ever to keep us awake, and on our toes without bells, and some of us are hearing the sounds of the hunting horn during this dark hour in our History. It can be lonely at night to be in the forest hearing the hounds at bay.
When a supporter of this political hopeful was here the other day, telling me that we had better vote for him, or trouble would lie ahead, it was tempting to mention that the guards of concentration camps were detected because they did not look starved, and this would have been in 'poor taste', one of the multiple reasons we are so divided.
The Times is doing better than ever to keep us awake, and on our toes without bells, and some of us are hearing the sounds of the hunting horn during this dark hour in our History. It can be lonely at night to be in the forest hearing the hounds at bay.
I know someone who tells people that "she knows people who know" and Hillary Clinton is a lesbian with cancer who smokes cigars and routinely beats Bill up with ashtrays. Putting aside that the only thing in that sentence that would even give me pause is the cancer notion, what the heck am I supposed to do with someone like that? People believe outrageous things because the LIKE it. People believe Trump's lies because they LIKE them. What they heck can you do about that?
10
How do you cover a charlatan? With honesty. After demanding truth, you simply tell the truth. Otherwise you're behaving like the hand of the charlatan, or worse, like the charlatan himself.
11
The post from Wendy from NJ reminded me of this email with a Republican (and evangelical) friend from back in May. She kept bringing up Benghazi and Hillary:
Hi Carol - While cleaning out my jewelry drawer today I found the most amazing half-article from 1986. I saved the article because of a picture on the other side.
The thing is, you will not believe how Reagan and Poindexter (Reagen's National Security Advisor) answered questions about how the White House "lied" about the Libya situation. Remember, this is 1986 before the Internet and especially FAUX News:
"An irate President Reagan said "no, no" when asked Friday if the White House had lied."
The last paragraph of this article is amazing:
"When asked Friday if there was a policy of lying in the Reagan administration, White House chief of staff Donald T. Regan angrily snapped: "You know better than that.""
This is totally laughable today but nobody knew the full ramifications of what the White House was doing back then.
So, like I said, you have to know all the facts before jumping on anyone's bandwagon. The Gaddafi/Libya situation was in play long, long before Hillary was a part of it. This is decades of history that the American people don't know about, weren't told about, just like most of history beginning with Reagan's administration to the financial collapse in 2008. If we really understood how we've been set up for years and years there would be a major revolt. This is what Bernie's talking about.
Hi Carol - While cleaning out my jewelry drawer today I found the most amazing half-article from 1986. I saved the article because of a picture on the other side.
The thing is, you will not believe how Reagan and Poindexter (Reagen's National Security Advisor) answered questions about how the White House "lied" about the Libya situation. Remember, this is 1986 before the Internet and especially FAUX News:
"An irate President Reagan said "no, no" when asked Friday if the White House had lied."
The last paragraph of this article is amazing:
"When asked Friday if there was a policy of lying in the Reagan administration, White House chief of staff Donald T. Regan angrily snapped: "You know better than that.""
This is totally laughable today but nobody knew the full ramifications of what the White House was doing back then.
So, like I said, you have to know all the facts before jumping on anyone's bandwagon. The Gaddafi/Libya situation was in play long, long before Hillary was a part of it. This is decades of history that the American people don't know about, weren't told about, just like most of history beginning with Reagan's administration to the financial collapse in 2008. If we really understood how we've been set up for years and years there would be a major revolt. This is what Bernie's talking about.
21
nothing to disagree with in this column, but it's obvious that many of trump's followers are immune to facts and logic.
29
Last week, the Toronto Star had an article on "the 12 falsehoods Trump said today." The article listed them one by one and debunked them one by one.
The Times, today, finally has a similar graphic. Good start.
Now cover the trump foundation with as much ink as the Clinton Foundation, but this time focussed on the actual misdeeds, rather than speculation. And banish the words "shadows" and "clouds."
Finally, stop with the "she's not perfect" language. When did perfection become the standard, for which there must be apologia for falling short? Put another way - when was a male candidate ever introduced with that phrase?
The Times, today, finally has a similar graphic. Good start.
Now cover the trump foundation with as much ink as the Clinton Foundation, but this time focussed on the actual misdeeds, rather than speculation. And banish the words "shadows" and "clouds."
Finally, stop with the "she's not perfect" language. When did perfection become the standard, for which there must be apologia for falling short? Put another way - when was a male candidate ever introduced with that phrase?
47
Yes, you and all journalists should report; that's your job. What you must also do is your homework--and then use your pulpit to accurately refute the false statements that Trump and his surrogates repeat until they are nailed with the truth.
7
I recently spent an airplane flight talking to a guy who will probably vote for Trump (He is not a Trump enthusiast but has learned to fear Hillary); I'm a strong supporter of Hillary. After spending a couple of hours talking about other topics (jobs, living in different places, life in the military, which we both know something about, and the recent shootings), we talked about the presidential election. I was struck by how on every subject that was political in any way (such as climate control or the election), he had an entirely different set of "facts," many of which I knew to be untrue. He watches mostly Fox News; I check the Times, the Post, CNN, BBC, Guardian, and other sources, so my news trends liberal but would I hope be more reliable. He complained that in one case, he'd heard about a Trump quote on Fox and then he heard about it on CNN "and they ADDED a word to make it sound much worse!" Though I don't know what the quote was, I imagine it is much more likely Fox abridged the quote than that CNN invented a word to add! The whole experience was very disheartening. Occasionally I'd say, "Well, actually, the statistics are XYZ" but in a plane it's all just hearsay and he'd been trained not to trust the media. There's no way through the smokescreen. On the bright side, we had a good, civil conversation despite our differences. If people could talk to each other with less of the angry framing and demonizing (esp from the right), we could maybe accomplish something.
19
This train wreck is past the point where journalists can fix it. There is only one thing that stands between Trump and the White House: Hillary Clinton. Let's hope that the debates are as obvious as we expect them to be and that she stands him down in our defense of a sane, more perfect union.
I suppose it will sound ridiculous to say that we should just trust the process at this point, but this ole gal is going to give it one more try. Let's play out the debates, inspire all Americans to vote their conscience and then live with the results.
I do find it ironic that with only 6% of the public trusting the press, so much focus has been placed on how the public doesn't trust Hillary Clinton...a telling example of the media's true sense of shame.
I suppose it will sound ridiculous to say that we should just trust the process at this point, but this ole gal is going to give it one more try. Let's play out the debates, inspire all Americans to vote their conscience and then live with the results.
I do find it ironic that with only 6% of the public trusting the press, so much focus has been placed on how the public doesn't trust Hillary Clinton...a telling example of the media's true sense of shame.
12
Orwell noted that language has power, and I've been impressed by what lengths the media will go to the avoid using the word "lie" in their reporting on things Trump has said that are obviously not true, and that he knows are not true. It's true that Trump utters more of these than ordinary candidates, despite having not even having a record in public office to lie about. But the reluctance extends to other candidates for office, including Mrs. Clinton. We take for granted, for instance, that candidates will say one thing in the primaries when seeking one set of votes, and say something else entirely in the general election, appealing to other voters. The press likes to call this a "pivot," but “lying” is more, well, truthful. Pushing simplistic slogans containing less thought than your average bumper sticker is elevated by the media to “sounding themes,” despite there being no substance involved. Sometimes you even read or hear admiring "news analyses" of who's lying to the public most effectively, and how liars who lag in this could do it even better! At its worst, it gets us into a disastrous war but even at its best it gives the public the sense that politicians lie to them constantly, and the press helps them do so. We need the liars to be called liars, and the lies to be called lies. If it's a fact that something is demonstrably factually false, then journalists are capable of reporting facts quite objectively.
4
This is good, but it needs to be applied to all Republicans, not just Donald Trump, who represents their essential and fundamental nature.
20
People have to realize that being a great showman doesn't equate to reaching the level of even a mediocre president. Therefore, the press should concentrate on the facts and fictions of these debates. Forget about which skin tone and toupee Trump has chosen for his make-up, and what color Clinton's pantsuit is or whether she is wearing jewelry. If she rolls her eyes at something he says, that shouldn't be bigger news than whether or not his statement was accurate. If he waves his hands around or mimics her stance, ignore him and stick to reporting on her comment.
To put it succinctly, cover this important event with the dignity it deserves.
To put it succinctly, cover this important event with the dignity it deserves.
11
"Our job is not stenography, but truth-telling."
For those actually aspiring to practice journalism, I can't think of a more powerful statement.
For those actually aspiring to practice journalism, I can't think of a more powerful statement.
11