Discussion
  • Read More
    Den LevyJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 6:21pm

    Just a note: none of these images were published while Dean Baquet was executive editor. These were published while Jill Abramson and Bill Keller held that position.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      J.K. TrotterDen Levy
      1/08/15 6:35pm

      Fair enough. But his comments applied to the Times as a whole, no?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      TI82J.K. Trotter
      1/08/15 7:43pm

      Is he supposed to go back in time and intervene? I realize that it's 2015 but Mr. Fusion hasn't quite hit the markets yet.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Hill Valley TelegraphJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 8:00pm

    Ahhhh.... If you don't see the difference between publishing the examples above, and publishing something that makes you a target for people who are specifically looking to run you over with AK-47's for "mocking" them, you're dense. I'm not saying the decision is right. But don't act dumb.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      J.K. TrotterHill Valley Telegraph
      1/08/15 8:09pm

      But Baquet didn’t say that; he said the difference was gratuitous offense. If he thinks the difference is in fact based on the physical threat publication might incur, he should say that.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    TrueVCUJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 5:15pm

    Let us not forget this gem

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      bLECHeeTrueVCU
      1/08/15 5:33pm

      That's The New Yorker, not the NY Times. The former is owned by Conde Nast, the latter by, well, the NY Times Co. Different*

      *unless you're saying the NYT reprinted a cover of The New Yorker

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      cattleprodTrueVCU
      1/09/15 9:42am

      Has anyone here, yet, at this point, up until now, pointed out to you that the New Yorker and the New York Times are, in fact, separate publications (as in, not the same thing), because they are different. I do not know if anyone has done this yet, but you should know this thing. The thing being that they are different. Thabks

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    J.K. TrotterJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 5:14pm

    The Times embedded this tweet in an article from last year:

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      BaneKittyJ.K. Trotter
      1/08/15 5:16pm

      Seems legit!

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      stupidsquirrelJ.K. Trotter
      1/08/15 6:28pm

      sadly many still believe this...and the whole "cause all wars" thing

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    J.K. TrotterJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 5:25pm

    It is also worth mentioning that no Times staffer told Baquet that he or she would feel endangered if the paper printed the Charlie Hebdo cartoons:

    He said he had spent “about half of my day” on the question, seeking out the views of senior editors and reaching out to reporters and editors in some of The Times’s international bureaus. They told him they would not feel endangered if The Times reproduced the images, he told me, but he remained concerned about staff safety.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Not an idiotJ.K. Trotter
      1/08/15 7:56pm

      It's also worth noting the racist cartoons were not designed to offend...you seem to misunderstand someone making something that is offensive because they are ignorant with something that is deliberately provocative.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    MichaelJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 5:40pm

    And then there's The Onion.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      dothedewMichael
      1/08/15 5:54pm

      The Profit's likeness is missing from that, unless he is hiding up the Buddha's bum. WTF The Onion?

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      AnastaciaBeaverhausenMichael
      1/08/15 6:04pm

      There is ALOT going on there.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    QwitcherBitchinJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 5:17pm

    Everything offends everybody! Everybody is a special snowflake! Ahh! I hate people who get offended by things. Who gives a shit? Let it go.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Ol DrippyQwitcherBitchin
      1/08/15 5:46pm

      You sound like you give a shit. You also sound like you're bitching. So why don't you... Ya know... Quit it.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      dothedewQwitcherBitchin
      1/08/15 5:50pm

      So would you say that you are offended by people who get offended by things?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    GMAFBJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 6:17pm

    Apparently the paper is willing to use "God Hates Fags" photos — it's right on the WBC T-shirts.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      J.K. TrotterGMAFB
      1/08/15 6:23pm

      Ah! You are right. I’ll correct.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    MindGrapesJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 7:49pm

    Most of your examples were not "designed to gratuitously offend." Then again, neither were the Charlie Hebdo comics.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      J.K. TrotterMindGrapes
      1/08/15 8:13pm

      Disagree, but I hear you.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    JohnBullJ.K. Trotter
    1/08/15 5:21pm

    Hebdo's political cartoons are not "designed to gratuitously offend", they are meant to get people to smarten the fuck up.

    Reply
    <