Discussion
  • Read More
    Sid and FinancyJ.K. Trotter
    2/29/16 3:32pm

    Moderately Reputable Journalism Outlet Abides by Standard Journalism Ethics

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      j4x_Sid and Financy
      2/29/16 3:36pm

      Thread’s over, turn off the lights.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      DolemiteSid and Financy
      2/29/16 3:39pm

      “When you say ‘off-the-record’, what exactly do those words mean, in the grand scheme of things? Like, if I were to publish these records or present the entire interview for the public to view, would that really be so bad?”

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    fighting polish is David Schwimmer as Rob Kardashian SrJ.K. Trotter
    2/29/16 3:36pm

    This feels like a really weird breach of protocol here by Ben Smith, right? Like, it’s an off the record conversation, so all remarks should be held in strict confidence.

    Even though he’s a gross racist fascist, off the record means off the record.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      benjaminalloverfighting polish is David Schwimmer as Rob Kardashian Sr
      2/29/16 3:40pm

      Maybe this is the point; he gets his “scoop” and the Times gets to maintain it’s adherence to basic principles*.

      *principles selectively applied

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      motherscratcherbenjaminallover
      2/29/16 3:47pm

      AND Donald Trump gets to have his cake and eat it too. He can stick to his strong stance of immigration with the hint to moderates that he's capable of a more relaxed approach. Smooth and shrewd as shit.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Alex PareeneJ.K. Trotter
    2/29/16 4:24pm

    The headline of this post has been updated to note that the Trump comments were off-the-record.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      LouiseCyphreAlex Pareene
      2/29/16 6:11pm

      LOL. So you need *an hour* to finally reflect the very essence of this story in your headline? What were you doing in the meantime, googling “Mussolini quotes”?

      What an *absolutely worthless* piece of trash GAWKER is.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    igotwordsJ.K. Trotter
    2/29/16 3:33pm

    Way to pull a Denethor NYT! Anyone still believe the incredible lie that the times is a “Liberal” paper?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Captain Hindsightigotwords
      2/29/16 3:39pm

      Way to pull a Denethor NYT! Anyone still believe the incredible lie that the times is a “Liberal” paper?

      A “Denethor”? What circles do you run in?

      Anyway - on the rest of your comment - if they aren’t liberal what are they? They sure aren’t middle or right.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      CharlieKellyKingofTheRatsigotwords
      2/29/16 3:43pm

      Their political bend has zero to do with not releasing “off the record” information. Not using “off the record” information is a standard in journalism.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    emooJ.K. Trotter
    2/29/16 4:04pm

    The old grey lady just ain’t what she used to be. Ain’t what she used to be, ain’t what she used to be...

    The New York Times circa 1971 did not sit on the Pentagon Papers for thirteen months. Furthermore, when the President approached the Times and asked them not to publish, they refused... in 1971. In 2005, they listened to Bush for ten more days. Is he just that much more likable than Nixon?

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Blinker Fluidemoo
      2/29/16 8:18pm

      The Pentagon Papers were not an explicitly off-the-record confidential conversation, something they afford countless sources daily, it was clear evidence of gov’t wrongdoing.

      Violating an explicit vow of confidentiality is as far from “1971 Times” as you can get. Reporters then (and now) regularly went to jail to protect journalistic confidentiality like this. To do otherwise would easily result in all of their background & OTR sources drying up, overnight, ending in the paper’s certain bankruptcy. It’s THAT big a deal.

      Reply
      <
    • Read More
      emooBlinker Fluid
      3/01/16 12:45am

      Really. Why don’t you name an NYT journalist who went to jail protecting a source for an article printed there in the last 10 years?

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    ww1383J.K. Trotter
    2/29/16 3:35pm

    How come Ben Smith never shows up on those“Middle age men wear adult diaper”videos on Buzzfeed.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      Gene Shalit's Merkinww1383
      2/29/16 3:39pm

      Because those videos, too, are off the record.

      Reply
      <
  • Read More
    Hollow_LogJ.K. Trotter
    2/29/16 3:39pm

    many Times employees believe Trump conveyed to the paper—during a portion of the meeting deemed off-the-record that his extreme policy positions on immigration are more flexible than he’s publicly admitted.

    This is a racist’s equivalent of the prize inside the cereal box not exactly matching the picture on the back of the box.

    Reply
    <
    • Read More
      PucksrJ.K. Trotter
      2/29/16 4:16pm

      This is actually pretty fucking interesting.

      Trump has been trying to secretly signal for awhile that he isn’t batshit crazy. This is a pretty good way to do it. He probably leaked the “off the record”-rumored conversation himself. Even if they do eventually release some information about the call, they would be dismissed by his zealot faction as a “smear campaign”.

      In the meantime, more rational voters are going to use this story to start to build a narrative that Trump is just an excellent media manipulator of the “Duck Dynasty Crowd”, but not really Hitler 2.0(because they saw through the veil with this NYT info).

      Journalists are going to continue to attack the shit out of him because they recognize this as literally identical to Nixon’s presidency. However, the regular public has forgotten about Nixon and his nearly bald-face manipulation.

      Reply
      <
      • Read More
        BeABigRedOneJ.K. Trotter
        2/29/16 3:35pm

        This stance can only be a shock to Gawker.

        Reply
        <
        • Read More
          IAMBlastedBiggsLostBurnerJ.K. Trotter
          2/29/16 3:36pm

          It's kind of like the '3 for $5 bargain bin' straight-to-video version of All The President's Men! Except, you know, without all the drama and dignity.

          Reply
          <