by Shelton Bumgarner
@bumgarls
It’s interesting how great The New York Times is on a tactical level and how bad it is on a strategic level. Be it the lead up to the Iraq War or normalizing Trump’s authoritarian inclinations, The Gray Lady collectively seems to need to go to therapy.
Now, I’m of the opinion this stems from the paper trying to play it completely down the middle in a time when to do so is a grave disservice to its audience. The paper as a whole wants to be completely objective. Unfortunately, we, as a nation, are in a chronic existential crisis. And, yet, I honestly don’t see any ready solution to the problem.
It’s not like The Paper Of Record can adopt advocacy journalism. So, I think we’re stuck with this particular problem long term.
Having said all that, I think it’s interesting to imagine a day when Rupert Murdoch finally got his life-long wish to own The New York Times. The crazy thing about such a thing is it’s not like people would go along with him turning it into a clone of FOX News. What would happen is all the brand-name liberal reporters would bounce. It would be the journalistic equivalent of the fall of Constantinople. A lot of other medium-sized newspapers would be flooded with some pretty spectator talent.
Or, they would band together to start a new newspaper that was The New York Times in all but name. It’s amusing how conservatives think if only they own The New York Times, they would make it’s generally liberal audience tag along.
