1. 3
  1.  

  2. 1

    This is a passable piece by David French. (One must be careful with French columns. The further he strays from religious liberty, where he tends to be excellent, the more likely it is that his columns will miss the mark.)

    The reason it’s merely passable is that French is too kind to the howling pack of #mediajackals denning in the once-storied halls of the New York Times. He writes:

    All in all, the story was one of the worst examples I’ve ever seen of neglecting story for narrative. The true story casts strong doubt on the narrative that many New York Times readers and staffers firmly believe; so the Times fed its readers the narrative… the needs of the narrative are still trumping the necessity of telling the story…

    This is an understatement. A more accurate way to put it is that the New York Times lied. Its editors knowingly published something that was not true (omitting key information makes it not true). They also knowingly concealed information that would undermine their political allies, and help President Trump–who of course is Orange Man Bad, so lying is morally acceptable and probably required.

    Don’t say they’re “neglecting story for narrative.” Call them liars. Or better yet, #mediajackals.