Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature currently requires accessing the site using the built-in Safari browser.
FoxNews definately offers bothe perspectives but I couldn't name any major newspaper, hence the need to repeal freedom of the press. It's a useless clause we guaranteed to the Press. They have mistreated a freedom the only noncitizen enjoys. The people expect the front page to not be the editorial page. It's biased from page 1 to the last.Such bullshit. Revoke Freedom of the Press. These assholes are the lapdogs of the democrat party. They don't "strive to reflect all political perspectives". Cancel your subscriptions people!ELECTION 2016
To Our Readers, From the Publisher and Executive Editor
NOV. 13, 2016
When the biggest political story of the year reached a dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night, our newsroom turned on a dime and did what it has done for nearly two years — cover the 2016 election with agility and creativity.
After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?
As we reflect on the momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.
We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our readers. We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.
Sincerely,
Arthur Sulzberger Jr., publisher
Dean Baquet, executive editor
#repealFOTP
Okay, and what news outlet does "strive to reflect all political perspectives"? And which people would buy such a newspaper?
It's not about abridging freedom of the press as much as it's about having standards in journalism.FoxNews definately offers bothe perspectives but I couldn't name any major newspaper, hence the need to repeal freedom of the press. It's a useless clause we guaranteed to the Press. They have mistreated a freedom the only noncitizen enjoys. The people expect the front page to not be the editorial page. It's biased from page 1 to the last.Such bullshit. Revoke Freedom of the Press. These assholes are the lapdogs of the democrat party. They don't "strive to reflect all political perspectives". Cancel your subscriptions people!ELECTION 2016
To Our Readers, From the Publisher and Executive Editor
NOV. 13, 2016
When the biggest political story of the year reached a dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night, our newsroom turned on a dime and did what it has done for nearly two years — cover the 2016 election with agility and creativity.
After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?
As we reflect on the momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.
We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our readers. We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.
Sincerely,
Arthur Sulzberger Jr., publisher
Dean Baquet, executive editor
#repealFOTP
Okay, and what news outlet does "strive to reflect all political perspectives"? And which people would buy such a newspaper?
But Fox is as biased as hell.
So, you want to repeal freedom of the press because the press doesn't say what you want them to say?
Also, mistreating freedom of the press is a reason to make sure no part of the press can be free.
That's such fascist thinking.
Of course they do. Fox even has liberal news anchors and employees like Geraldo and Shepard Smith. Name me one conservative anchor or employee working for MSNBC or CNN? We know the major networks don't. If you can name one, I'll watch their networ, if they don't have a problem with Trump. Never Trumpers are traitors.No. Fox doesn't present both sides. They might allow someone with an opposing view to participate in a discussion against 4 or 5 who spout the right wing line, and interrupt and talk over the one person, but they never give a fair opportunity for that person to present his case.
It's not about abridging freedom of the press as much as it's about having standards in journalism.FoxNews definately offers bothe perspectives but I couldn't name any major newspaper, hence the need to repeal freedom of the press. It's a useless clause we guaranteed to the Press. They have mistreated a freedom the only noncitizen enjoys. The people expect the front page to not be the editorial page. It's biased from page 1 to the last.Such bullshit. Revoke Freedom of the Press. These assholes are the lapdogs of the democrat party. They don't "strive to reflect all political perspectives". Cancel your subscriptions people!ELECTION 2016
To Our Readers, From the Publisher and Executive Editor
NOV. 13, 2016
When the biggest political story of the year reached a dramatic and unexpected climax late Tuesday night, our newsroom turned on a dime and did what it has done for nearly two years — cover the 2016 election with agility and creativity.
After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?
As we reflect on the momentous result, and the months of reporting and polling that preceded it, we aim to rededicate ourselves to the fundamental mission of Times journalism. That is to report America and the world honestly, without fear or favor, striving always to understand and reflect all political perspectives and life experiences in the stories that we bring to you. It is also to hold power to account, impartially and unflinchingly. You can rely on The New York Times to bring the same fairness, the same level of scrutiny, the same independence to our coverage of the new president and his team.
We cannot deliver the independent, original journalism for which we are known without the loyalty of our readers. We want to take this opportunity, on behalf of all Times journalists, to thank you for that loyalty.
Sincerely,
Arthur Sulzberger Jr., publisher
Dean Baquet, executive editor
#repealFOTP
Okay, and what news outlet does "strive to reflect all political perspectives"? And which people would buy such a newspaper?
But Fox is as biased as hell.
So, you want to repeal freedom of the press because the press doesn't say what you want them to say?
Also, mistreating freedom of the press is a reason to make sure no part of the press can be free.
That's such fascist thinking.
The standard should apply to omission, too.It's not about abridging freedom of the press as much as it's about having standards in journalism.FoxNews definately offers bothe perspectives but I couldn't name any major newspaper, hence the need to repeal freedom of the press. It's a useless clause we guaranteed to the Press. They have mistreated a freedom the only noncitizen enjoys. The people expect the front page to not be the editorial page. It's biased from page 1 to the last.Such bullshit. Revoke Freedom of the Press. These assholes are the lapdogs of the democrat party. They don't "strive to reflect all political perspectives". Cancel your subscriptions people!
#repealFOTP
Okay, and what news outlet does "strive to reflect all political perspectives"? And which people would buy such a newspaper?
But Fox is as biased as hell.
So, you want to repeal freedom of the press because the press doesn't say what you want them to say?
Also, mistreating freedom of the press is a reason to make sure no part of the press can be free.
That's such fascist thinking.
There are standards. These journalists will often have to back up their claims, they'll get fired if they fake shit.
Unlike the president who a lot of people calling for an end to freedom of the press believe without using the nut inside their skull.
The standard should apply to omission, too.It's not about abridging freedom of the press as much as it's about having standards in journalism.FoxNews definately offers bothe perspectives but I couldn't name any major newspaper, hence the need to repeal freedom of the press. It's a useless clause we guaranteed to the Press. They have mistreated a freedom the only noncitizen enjoys. The people expect the front page to not be the editorial page. It's biased from page 1 to the last.Okay, and what news outlet does "strive to reflect all political perspectives"? And which people would buy such a newspaper?
But Fox is as biased as hell.
So, you want to repeal freedom of the press because the press doesn't say what you want them to say?
Also, mistreating freedom of the press is a reason to make sure no part of the press can be free.
That's such fascist thinking.
There are standards. These journalists will often have to back up their claims, they'll get fired if they fake shit.
Unlike the president who a lot of people calling for an end to freedom of the press believe without using the nut inside their skull.
This is where standards need to apply. The excuse of private business interests needs to be transcended by journalistic standards.The standard should apply to omission, too.It's not about abridging freedom of the press as much as it's about having standards in journalism.FoxNews definately offers bothe perspectives but I couldn't name any major newspaper, hence the need to repeal freedom of the press. It's a useless clause we guaranteed to the Press. They have mistreated a freedom the only noncitizen enjoys. The people expect the front page to not be the editorial page. It's biased from page 1 to the last.
But Fox is as biased as hell.
So, you want to repeal freedom of the press because the press doesn't say what you want them to say?
Also, mistreating freedom of the press is a reason to make sure no part of the press can be free.
That's such fascist thinking.
There are standards. These journalists will often have to back up their claims, they'll get fired if they fake shit.
Unlike the president who a lot of people calling for an end to freedom of the press believe without using the nut inside their skull.
And who gets to decide what is important enough to be FORCED into the media?
What MUST be in a PRIVATE COMPANY'S media?
This is where standards need to apply. The excuse of private business interests needs to be transcended by journalistic standards.The standard should apply to omission, too.It's not about abridging freedom of the press as much as it's about having standards in journalism.But Fox is as biased as hell.
So, you want to repeal freedom of the press because the press doesn't say what you want them to say?
Also, mistreating freedom of the press is a reason to make sure no part of the press can be free.
That's such fascist thinking.
There are standards. These journalists will often have to back up their claims, they'll get fired if they fake shit.
Unlike the president who a lot of people calling for an end to freedom of the press believe without using the nut inside their skull.
And who gets to decide what is important enough to be FORCED into the media?
What MUST be in a PRIVATE COMPANY'S media?
Otherwise you end up with overt propaganda. Almost exclusively left wing.
Kristol and Will are non-trump more than anything left or right.Newspaper is excellent for cleaning windows. Saves cost on paper towels.
I used to use it to line the bottom of my bird cage. Then it started pissing them off, so now I use the WSJ.
You should try George Will, and Bill Kristol columns.....they are really good although they are pre soaked in B.S. these days....
Will used to be OK. He was always an elitist but he made some good points. Lately he is too screechy for me. kristol has always been a sanctimonious ass. I stopped paying him the slightest bit of attention over two decades ago.
They’re both elitist. But kristol may be party-ambivalent while Will is just more anti-trump and ego driven.Kristol and Will are non-trump more than anything left or right.Newspaper is excellent for cleaning windows. Saves cost on paper towels.
I used to use it to line the bottom of my bird cage. Then it started pissing them off, so now I use the WSJ.
You should try George Will, and Bill Kristol columns.....they are really good although they are pre soaked in B.S. these days....
Will used to be OK. He was always an elitist but he made some good points. Lately he is too screechy for me. kristol has always been a sanctimonious ass. I stopped paying him the slightest bit of attention over two decades ago.
Nope. They are both hard corp elitists. They don't care which Party actually runs the country, so long as it is collectivist in the end.
/——-/ In order to cancel, I would first have to subscribe. Too much work.Toilet Paper is better reading than the NYT these days. What a shame as it used to be a choice paper of sublime intelligence. Sue Don, sue! This Sunday's NYT has full page pic of Nazi salutes. Then there's this crap: ...
"A middle-aged priest. A 26-year-old woman. A registered sex offender.
Three seemingly very different people with one thing in common: All three were accused of sexually assaulting fellow passengers on airplanes.
Even before Jessica Leeds alleged last week that Donald Trump touched her inappropriately during a flight in 1979, many frequent fliers had concluded that increasingly cramped planes with fewer flight attendants walking the aisle seem to embolden-gropers..."...................................................................................................................................................................................................................and this crap in the "Science" section: Kaakutja, Perhaps the First Known Boomerang Victim.............
By NICHOLAS ST. FLEUR............................................................and this is theirView attachment 94957 idea of women's fashion:
