New York Times

Subterms

    Latest story

    200 Shares34 Views

    To protect US democracy from tyrants, we must protect the truly free press | Robert Reich

    by

    Reliable and independent sources of news are now threatened by growing alliances of oligarchs and authoritarians.The mainstream media doesn’t use the term “oligarchy” to describe the billionaires who are using their wealth to enlarge their political power around the world, but that is what is happening.This is why I write for and read the Guardian, and why I’m urgently appealing to you to support it.During the US presidential campaign, legacy mainstream media – who mostly answer to corporate or billionaire ownership – refrained from reporting how incoherent and bizarre Donald Trump was becoming, normalizing and “sanewashing” his increasingly wild utterances even as it reported every minor slip by Joe Biden.The New York Times headlined its report on the September 2024 presidential debate between the president-elect and Kamala Harris – in which Trump issued conspiracy theories about stolen elections, crowd sizes, and Haitian immigrants eating pet cats and dogs – as: Harris and Trump bet on their own sharply contrasting views of America.Trump also used virulent rhetoric towards journalists. He has called the free press “scum” and the “enemy within”. During his campaign, he called for revoking the licenses of television networks and jailing journalists who won’t reveal their anonymous sources.Come 20 January, Trump and his toadies – including billionaires such as Elon Musk and Vivek Ramaswamy – will have total control over the executive branch of the United States government. Trump’s Maga Republicans will be in charge of both chambers of Congress as well.Most members of the US supreme court, some of whom have been beneficiaries of billionaire gifts, have already signaled their willingness to consolidate even more power in Trump’s hands, immunize him from criminal liability for anything he does, and further open the floodgates of big money into US politics.All of this is sending a message from the United States that liberalism’s core tenets, including the rule of law and freedom of the press, are up for grabs.Elsewhere around the world, alliances of economic elites and authoritarians similarly threaten public access to the truth, without which democracy cannot thrive.It’s a vicious cycle: citizens have grown cynical about democracy because decision-making has become dominated by economic elites, and that cynicism has ushered in authoritarians who are even more solicitous of such elites.Trump and his lapdogs have lionized Victor Orbán and Hungary’s Fidesz party, which transformed a once-vibrant democracy into a one-party state, muzzling the media and rewarding the wealthy.Trump’s success will likely encourage other authoritarians, such as Marine Le Pen and her National Rally party in France; Alternative in Germany, or AfD; Italy’s far-right Giorgia Meloni; and radical rightwing parties in the Netherlands and Austria.Trump’s triumph will embolden Russia’s Vladimir Putin – the world’s most dangerous authoritarian oligarch – not only in Ukraine and potentially eastern Europe but also in his worldwide campaign of disinformation seeking to undermine democracies.skip past newsletter promotionafter newsletter promotionEvidence is mounting that Russia and other foreign agents used Musk’s X platform to disrupt the US presidential campaign in favor of Trump. Musk did little to stop them.During the campaign, Musk himself reposted to his 200 million followers a faked version of Harris’s first campaign video with an altered voice track sounding like the vice-president and saying she “does not know the first thing about running the country” and is the “ultimate diversity hire”. Musk tagged the video “amazing”. It received hundreds of millions of views.According to a report from the Center for Countering Digital Hate, Musk posted at least 50 false election claims on X, which garnered a total of at least 1.2bn views. None had a “community note” from X’s supposed fact-checking system.Rupert Murdoch, another oligarch who champions authoritarianism, has turned his Fox News, Wall Street Journal, and New York Post into outlets of rightwing propaganda, which have amplified Trump’s lies.Jeff Bezos, the billionaire owner of the Washington Post, prohibited the newspaper from endorsing Kamala Harris. Evidently, he didn’t want to raise Trump’s ire because Bezos’s other businesses depend on government contracts and his largest – Amazon – is already the target of a federal antitrust suit.Bezos’s decision demonstrated that even the possibility of a Trump presidency could force what had been one of the most courageous newspapers in the US to censor itself. Marty Baron, former editor of the Post, called the move “cowardice, with democracy as its casualty”.Citizens concerned about democracy must monitor those in power, act as watchdogs against abuses of power, challenge those abuses, organize and litigate, and sound the alarm about wrongdoing and wrongful policies.But not even the most responsible of citizens can do these things without reliable sources of information. The public doesn’t know what stories have been censored, muted, judged out of bounds, or preemptively not covered by journalists who’d rather not take the risk.In the final weeks before the election, the billionaire owner of the Los Angeles Times, Patrick Soon-Shiong, blocked his newspaper’s planned endorsement of Harris, prompting the head of the paper’s editorial board to resign. Mariel Garza said she was “not OK with us being silent”, adding: “In dangerous times, honest people need to stand up.”Honest people standing up is precisely what resisting authoritarianism and protecting democracy require. Americans and the citizens of other countries must have access to the truth if we have any hope of standing up to tyranny.The Guardian remains a reliable and trustworthy source of news because it is truly independent. That’s why I’m writing this, and why you’re reading it.Unlike other US media organizations, the Guardian cannot be co-opted by the growing alliances of oligarchs and authoritarians. It does not depend for its existence on billionaires or the good graces of a demagogue; it depends on us.Please support the Guardian today. More

    More stories

    • 163 Shares130 Views

      in Elections

      Resultados electorales y la aguja del Times: esto es lo que necesitas saber

      by

      Así te traeremos los últimos totales de votos y cálculos del resultado en las contiendas electorales.Llevamos meses preparándonos para informar sobre miles de contiendas federales, estatales y locales el día de las elecciones, entre otras cosas recopilando resultados y otros datos sobre el recuento de votos de los distritos electorales y condados de todo el país. Este año, un equipo de casi 100 periodistas, ingenieros, estadísticos, expertos en datos e investigadores del Times colaboran para ofrecer resultados actualizados al minuto, que se muestran en directo en nytimes.com con una completa gama de mapas y gráficos interactivos para que puedas ver lo que está ocurriendo en las contiendas más importantes de la noche.Esos datos también alimentan la aguja, nuestro modelo estadístico de la noche electoral, que calcula el resultado final basándose en los resultados parciales de las elecciones, ayudando a los lectores a entender qué pasa con los votos que se han contado hasta ahora.La publicación de la aguja en directo la noche electoral depende de sistemas informáticos mantenidos por ingenieros de toda la empresa, algunos de los cuales están actualmente en huelga. La forma en que mostremos nuestra previsión electoral dependerá de esos sistemas, así como de los datos que recibamos, y solo publicaremos una versión en directo de la aguja si estamos seguros de que esos sistemas son estables.Si no podemos transmitir los resultados de la aguja en directo, nuestros periodistas tienen previsto ejecutar su modelo estadístico periódicamente, examinar sus resultados y publicar actualizaciones en nuestro blog en directo sobre lo que vean, dando a nuestros lectores una idea de la situación real de la contienda a lo largo de la noche.Presentamos la aguja en 2016 y la hemos estado perfeccionando desde entonces. A continuación te explicamos cómo funciona:Preguntas sobre la aguja electoral y los datos que la alimentan¿Por qué tener la aguja?¿Cómo funciona la aguja?¿Cómo se lee la aguja?¿Utiliza la aguja Inteligencia Artificial?¿Cómo calcula el Times quién gana en cada contienda?¿De dónde proceden los datos de la aguja y qué tipo de datos recogemos?¿Qué tipo de contacto tenemos con los funcionarios electorales?¿Son frecuentes los errores de datos en la noche electoral? ¿Cómo se detectan y solucionan?¿Por qué a veces se tarda tanto en saber quién ha ganado?We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 138 Shares198 Views

      in Elections

      Harris Campaign Ads Use John Kelly’s Words Describing Trump as ‘Fascist’

      by

      Vice President Kamala Harris’s campaign is turning a recording of Donald J. Trump’s former White House chief of staff John F. Kelly, in which he describes the former president as meeting “the general definition of fascist,” into two stark new ads.The ads are the latest attempt by Ms. Harris, in the final two weeks, to turn the 2024 race into a referendum on Mr. Trump and his fitness for office. Ms. Harris delivered a televised statement at her residence this week after Mr. Kelly’s comments were published, saying they were sounding an alarm to the nation.The ads, titled “A Warning,” are scheduled to immediately go into the Harris campaign’s rotation of television and digital advertising, a campaign official said, adding that they would be targeted in particular at markets with larger populations of veterans.And Ms. Harris underscored the message at a CNN town hall on Wednesday when she herself also called Mr. Trump a “fascist.”Both the 30-second and the 60-second ads begin with a black screen and a pulsating, alarm-like sound as the words, “An unprecedented warning …” are typed onto the screen.The text then identifies Mr. Kelly, Mr. Trump’s former chief of staff and a four-star Marine general, before cutting to a recording of Mr. Kelly’s recent interview with a reporter for The New York Times, Michael S. Schmidt.“Do you think he’s a fascist?” Mr. Schmidt asks.The 30-second version compresses Mr. Kelly’s response: “He certainly falls into the general definition of a fascist: using the military to go after American citizens.”The 60-second version quotes Mr. Kelly at greater length: “He certainly falls into the general definition of a fascist. It’s a far-right, authoritarian, ultranationalist political ideology and movement characterized by a dictatorial leader. The former president — he is certainly an authoritarian. Using the military to go after American citizens is a very bad thing.”Both ads also include a clip of Mr. Kelly quoting Mr. Trump as saying, “Hitler did some good things, too.”The pulsating alarm sound continues throughout both ads, with the same red text typing at the end: “Donald Trump is unhinged. Unstable. In pursuit of unchecked power.”Mr. Trump has attacked Mr. Kelly since his public comments, such as in an interview on Fox News on Thursday in Arizona.“I fired him,” Mr. Trump said, according to a transcript provided by Fox News. “He made a statement that I’m like Hitler. It’s — just couldn’t be further from the truth. It’s just the opposite, actually.” More

    • 150 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      5 conclusiones de la entrevista de Vance con The New York Times

      by

      Cuando se le preguntó si creía que las elecciones de 2020 habían sido robadas, Vance eludió responder repetidamente. Y defendió el sentimiento detrás de su comentario “señoras con gatos y sin hijos”, aunque se arrepintió de su elección de palabras.JD Vance sigue participando en la campaña.El candidato republicano a la vicepresidencia y senador por Ohio en su primer mandato habla con los periodistas en los mítines electorales. Está agendando entrevistas en cadenas de televisión y por cable. Y le concedió una entrevista a The New York Times.Algo ha cambiado en la política estadounidense cuando es digno de mención que un candidato se enfrente de manera voluntaria a una pregunta tras otra sin tener un guion. Pero así estamos.En su más reciente participación con los medios de comunicación, Vance se sentó con Lulu Garcia-Navarro, copresentadora de The Interview, un pódcast de The New York Times que presenta una conversación de una hora con un único invitado cada sábado.A continuación, ofrecemos cinco conclusiones de la entrevista de Vance:Sus críticos le llaman débil. Él dice que es complejoParece poco probable que Donald Trump se describa a sí mismo como una persona reflexiva. Vance no puede parar.La entrevista comienza con García-Navarro diciéndole a Vance que, mientras se preparaba para su reunión, surgió una pregunta persistente entre la gente: “¿Cuál JD se va a presentar?”.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 163 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Most Voters Have Been Offended by Trump. It’s Not Always a Deal Breaker.

      by

      The vast majority of voters across the United States say they have been offended at some point by former President Donald J. Trump. But a sizable number of those voters say that has not stopped them from supporting him.Overall, 70 percent of voters said that the former president had ever offended them, according to new polling from The New York Times and Siena College.But big differences emerge when voters were asked when they were offended.Nearly half — 46 percent — of the group said that they had been offended recently. Ms. Harris won that group by a margin of more than 80 percentage points.But it was a different story among the 23 percent who said that they had been offended by Mr. Trump, but further in the past. Mr. Trump won that group by roughly 40 percentage points.Donald Trump wins voters who said they found him offensive, but not recently, by a wide margin Has Donald Trump ever said anything that you found offensive?

      Source: A New York Times/Siena College poll of 3,385 voters nationwide conducted from Sept. 29 to Oct. 6By The New York TimesThe question of offensive rhetoric has been a feature of Mr. Trump’s candidacy as long as he has been running for president. He began his first run for the presidency in 2015 by claiming that Mexico was sending “rapists” into America. He won that election after a tape surfaced in which bragged about grabbing women’s genitals. More recently he falsely claimed that immigrants in Ohio were eating people’s pets.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 88 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      A Cryptic Letter With a Clear Warning

      by

      A domestic terrorist group sent a note to The New York Times admitting to detonating a bomb in Queens.Nearly 50 years ago, on Jan. 29, 1975, a bomb exploded inside the State Department’s headquarters in Washington, D.C., damaging the building but causing no injuries. A bomb was discovered that same day at a federal office building in Oakland, Calif., and was safely detonated.The acts were part of a spree of violence by a far-left militant group, Weather Underground, a splinter group of the Students for a Democratic Society, which opposed the Vietnam War. (The group took its name from lyrics written by Bob Dylan — “You don’t need a weatherman to know which way the wind blows” — in the song “Subterranean Homesick Blues.”) In a manifesto, the Weather Underground called for “the destruction of U.S. imperialism and the achievement of a classless world: world communism.”In late 1970, about a year after the group’s formation, The New York Times received a cryptic letter dated Oct. 9. Painted across the note was a red, five-pointed star, a symbol for Communism. The letter was signed in large cursive letters: Weatherman.That letter is currently stored in the “morgue,” The Times’s vast clippings archive.The letter makes reference to “slave ships of the twentieth century” and says that “with rallies and riots, with marches and Molotovs, kids in New York City and around the country will continue the battle.”Most startling is that the group claimed credit for an attack in Queens: “Last night as part of an international conspiracy we blew up the Long Island City Criminal Courthouse,” the letter reads. The explosion, which occurred on the third floor, heavily damaged the interior of the gray stone building.The group would ultimately claim responsibility for more than 25 bombings, according to the F.B.I., including at the Capitol building in March 1971. The group eventually splintered as the Vietnam War came to an end, disbanding in the late ’70s.In a 2020 guest essay for Times Opinion, Mark Rudd, a community organizer who once belonged to the Weather Underground, described his time with the group. “We didn’t realize that the violence we claimed we hated had infected our souls,” he wrote. “At the time, I’m not sure we’d have cared.” More

    • 150 Shares169 Views

      in Elections

      Trump Gets a Lift From Arizona Ticket-Splitters Backing a Democrat for Senate

      by

      Representative Ruben Gallego, the Democratic candidate for Senate, leads in this key contest, a New York Times/Siena College poll found, while Kamala Harris trails Donald Trump.Former President Donald J. Trump appears to be benefiting from ticket-splitters in Arizona, according to a New York Times/Siena College poll released on Monday, a finding that highlights his strength with Latino and younger voters as well as the unique weaknesses of the Republican nominee for Senate.The poll found Representative Ruben Gallego, the Democratic candidate for Senate, leading Kari Lake, a close ally of Mr. Trump’s, by six percentage points, even as Mr. Trump has opened up a five-point lead in the state over Vice President Kamala Harris.Such a scenario would represent a notable degree of ticket-splitting, perpetuating a trend captured by surveys throughout this election cycle. Democratic Senate candidates in a number of swing states, including Arizona and Nevada, have consistently polled ahead of the top of the ticket, especially when President Biden was the party’s standard-bearer. As Ms. Harris’s nomination has made the election more competitive, the gap between her and those down-ballot Democrats has narrowed — but the trend persists in most races in swing states.“Donald Trump creates his own weather, and he has a coalition supporting him like no other Republican nominee in our lifetime — perhaps ever — in Arizona,” said Stan Barnes, a former Republican state lawmaker who is now a political consultant there. He pointed to the support Mr. Trump has garnered from young people and voters of color, who traditionally lean Democratic, in surveys this year. “He’s breaking out of that rule, and it does not translate down-ballot,” he said.In 2022, Ms. Lake angered many traditionally Republican voters during her divisive governor’s race, feuding with the governor at the time, Doug Ducey, a conservative Republican, and angering supporters of Senator John McCain, who died in 2018, by saying her political rise “drove a stake through the heart of the McCain machine.” She further alienated some Republicans by filing a series of lawsuits after she lost her election, claiming that it had been stolen.This year, she has tried to change tactics, courting the moderate wing of the Republican Party in Arizona. But old grievances die hard.We are having trouble retrieving the article content.Please enable JavaScript in your browser settings.Thank you for your patience while we verify access. If you are in Reader mode please exit and log into your Times account, or subscribe for all of The Times.Thank you for your patience while we verify access.Already a subscriber? Log in.Want all of The Times? Subscribe. More

    • 125 Shares199 Views

      in Elections

      Videos From Kiryat Bialik Show Hezbollah Missile Striking Residential Area

      by

      A missile fired by Hezbollah slammed into a residential neighborhood in the Israeli town of Kiryat Bialik on Sunday morning, setting cars and a building ablaze and blowing out the windows of nearby apartments, numerous videos verified by The New York Times show.The missile was part of a large overnight barrage that Israel’s military said included around 150 rockets, cruise missiles and drones. Air defenses intercepted most, according to the military, but Kiryat Bialik, near the city of Haifa, suffered a direct hit.A dashcam video recorded inside a parked car in a densely populated neighborhood of the town captured the sound of loud booms before a missile was seen exploding with a flash and smoke around 30 yards away.A second video showed at least two vehicles engulfed in flames and a building next to them on fire, as people ran toward the vehicles and sprayed extinguishers. “Firefighters are on the other side,” one person says. “Get closer, get closer.”Across the street from the strike, a resident filmed inside an upper-floor apartment. The force of the blast shattered the apartment’s windows, scattered glass across the floor and kitchen countertops and knocked photographs off a wall, the video shows.A later video showed the scene after the blaze was extinguished. A large hose lay on the ground, the cars were smoldering and smoke was rising from a window of the building that had been alight but was now blackened. Debris had pockmarked the walls of other buildings in the area. More

    • 150 Shares119 Views

      in Elections

      Join NYT Cooking for an ‘Easy Weeknight Dinners’ Book Talk in N.Y.C.

      by

      Emily Weinstein, Melissa Clark and Eric Kim will discuss the new cookbook, recipe writing, their go-to meals and tips for simple yet delicious cooking in a special event with Taffy Brodesser-Akner on Oct. 7 at the Times Center.Join us in person at the Times Center in New York City to celebrate the publication of New York Times Cooking’s new book, “Easy Weeknight Dinners,” by Emily Weinstein, editor in chief of Cooking and the Food section, with recipes from Cooking’s extraordinary contributing writers. Inspired by one of The New York Times’s most popular newsletters, Emily’s “Five Weeknight Dishes,” this book offers 100 fast and flavorful meals that will satisfy whether you’re seeking a standout dinner for one, crowd pleasers for picky kids or something special for company. Just because you’re busy doesn’t mean that you can’t have something excellent to eat.As a guest of this exclusive event you’ll have an opportunity to hear directly from Emily, who will be joined onstage by Melissa Clark and Eric Kim, two Cooking columnists. They’ll discuss recipe writing, go-to meals and tips for easy excellence in the kitchen, in conversation with Taffy Brodesser-Akner, a New York Times Magazine contributor and the author of “Long Island Compromise.”Come to ask questions, mingle and meet Emily, Melissa and Eric. Stay for a Cooking tasting to enjoy samples of the recipes, buy a copy of the book and get it signed. Click here to register.Doors open at 6 p.m.Event runs from 6:30 to 7:30 p.m.Signing and reception until 10 p.m.This invitation is nontransferable, and admits two people. Please indicate on your registration the number of tickets you’re requesting. An ID is required for entrance. More