Glad you're pointing this out now, and the parallels to what was done to Hillary. Doen't mean it won't work, because woman, because woman of color, because woman of color married to a Jewish man. But at least I don't feel so alone and have something tamgible to which I can point people - starting with this piece here.
Thank you. I, like you, have little hope for the media becoming more self-aware. But it’s good to make connection with a community of people who “get” it, such as yourself. Thanks again.
Please do not give the NYTs any space. They are in thrall to the idea of a horse race and their oligarch owners want Trump to win. The people in charge over there are traitors.
I wish I could ignore the Times. But as a mainstream media critic, I’m afraid I have to give the outlets I criticize “space.” It’s a nasty job, but someone has to do it! Not everyone notices what’s going on.
Kamala’s treatment by the press has been flagrantly unfair. A New York Times profile dissed her for being hard on her staff, citing examples we’ve all seen time and again in male bosses. She’s been called the most ineffective VP ever, but what exactly constitutes an “effective” VP? Until Biden made her his ambassador for abortion rights (talk about effective!), she hasn’t had a chance to shine. The public is getting to know her and excitement is mounting, although she still faces all the familiar obstacles to women running for office. From a WaPo story this morning: “Another Democrat, however, cited Harris’s gender as a potential obstacle. ‘I don’t know if this country is ready for a woman President yet and this election is too important to take a chance,’ said a 74-year-old White woman from Arizona.” This from Democratic woman my age. Unbelievable.
“The country” doesn’t need to be “ready.” She just needs to win the election. And she has things going for her that Hillary didn’t. Among other things, there’s no Bernie wing trashing her. Which doesn’t mean she isn’t going to encounter a pile of bullshit from Republicans. But the Dems are much more unified than they were for Hillary, and so far the liberal press isn’t out to get her the way they were with Hillary. They dare not—she’s not just a woman, she’s a Black woman.
You nailed it once again. Women are still fighting for equal treatment and equal time. Hillary was criminalized by the media and Bernie and even the DNC who didn’t stand up for. I noticed similar treatment of Kamala and nobody questions this treatment when women are involved - we are dismissed and in Hillary’s case ghosted by the media for a crime she NEVER committed. It’s dangerous to our democracy to continue repeating the lies the media has imbedded in all our brains! We need to do better media!
Glad you're pointing this out now, and the parallels to what was done to Hillary. Doen't mean it won't work, because woman, because woman of color, because woman of color married to a Jewish man. But at least I don't feel so alone and have something tamgible to which I can point people - starting with this piece here.
Thank you. I, like you, have little hope for the media becoming more self-aware. But it’s good to make connection with a community of people who “get” it, such as yourself. Thanks again.
Please do not give the NYTs any space. They are in thrall to the idea of a horse race and their oligarch owners want Trump to win. The people in charge over there are traitors.
I wish I could ignore the Times. But as a mainstream media critic, I’m afraid I have to give the outlets I criticize “space.” It’s a nasty job, but someone has to do it! Not everyone notices what’s going on.
Kamala’s treatment by the press has been flagrantly unfair. A New York Times profile dissed her for being hard on her staff, citing examples we’ve all seen time and again in male bosses. She’s been called the most ineffective VP ever, but what exactly constitutes an “effective” VP? Until Biden made her his ambassador for abortion rights (talk about effective!), she hasn’t had a chance to shine. The public is getting to know her and excitement is mounting, although she still faces all the familiar obstacles to women running for office. From a WaPo story this morning: “Another Democrat, however, cited Harris’s gender as a potential obstacle. ‘I don’t know if this country is ready for a woman President yet and this election is too important to take a chance,’ said a 74-year-old White woman from Arizona.” This from Democratic woman my age. Unbelievable.
To that woman, who raised the perennial issue:
“The country” doesn’t need to be “ready.” She just needs to win the election. And she has things going for her that Hillary didn’t. Among other things, there’s no Bernie wing trashing her. Which doesn’t mean she isn’t going to encounter a pile of bullshit from Republicans. But the Dems are much more unified than they were for Hillary, and so far the liberal press isn’t out to get her the way they were with Hillary. They dare not—she’s not just a woman, she’s a Black woman.
You nailed it once again. Women are still fighting for equal treatment and equal time. Hillary was criminalized by the media and Bernie and even the DNC who didn’t stand up for. I noticed similar treatment of Kamala and nobody questions this treatment when women are involved - we are dismissed and in Hillary’s case ghosted by the media for a crime she NEVER committed. It’s dangerous to our democracy to continue repeating the lies the media has imbedded in all our brains! We need to do better media!
Thanks to my friend Carol Wright, here’s a different view (from the NYT) on how Kamala is doing: https://www.dw.com/en/us-vice-president-kamala-harris-how-is-she-doing/a-64155494?fbclid=IwAR2qlk1UA_sjgGW0LT0WnRsrFlQ1IDN2zhRBck5xNSQH_sWKpERo7Xk3UEI
Is it just me, or has The New York Times not missed a step, supporting the party that favors tax breaks for the rich?
Kamala is not struggling nor foundering. She is a star. The New York Times is foundering, and has lost my and countless other subscriptions.
“This is bad for The New York Times because…”
It’s not just you. They been a problem for a long time