“If you wondered where the New York Times‘ massive, 9-part iEconomy series was headed, here’s a clue: Part 1 was published on Jan. 21, and Part 9 on Thursday, Dec. 27 — just under the wire, we presume, for the Dec. 25 electronic submission deadline for the 2012 Pulitzer Prizes in Journalism,” Philip Elmer-DeWitt reports for Fortune.
“For reporters who know about these things, the series had Pulitzer written all over it from the start. The plan was simple: Single out Apple (AAPL) as what biologists might call a “conspicuous megafauna” — the high-profile stand-in for thousands U.S. firms that have been shipping American jobs overseas,” P.E.D. reports. “Never mind that Apple’s competitors all outsource work, sidestep taxes, use patents as weapons and turn an even blinder eye to labor abuses in the Asian supply chain. The fact is, Apple — always a draw for readers — made a big, fat, easy target.”
P.E.D. reports, “But the Times, which has won a record 108 Pulitzers, knows better than any other American newspaper that what the prize committee wants to see is evidence that all this reporting has led to real, substantive reform. And that’s what Part 9 — ‘Signs of Changes’ — sets out to show.”
Read more in the full article – recommended – here.
MacDailyNews Take: The New York Times. “All the Concocted, Manufactured ‘News’ We Can Fit.”
We can almost hear the old dying media dinosaurs sputtering in their lavish yet methodically emptying offices, “But, but, but… this is not something we talk about in print; this talk is only for our New York cocktail parties!”
Look around carefully, NY Slimes, in the end, when you’re shutting out the lights because the public can finally see right through you, those 100+ Pulitzers won’t be worth a bucket of warm piss.
[Thanks to MacDailyNews Reader “JayinDC” for the heads up.]
Related articles:
The New York Times blows it again: Incorrectly reports Apple’s tax rate – April 30, 2012
Rush Limbaugh: New York Times targeting Apple; latest hit piece based on erroneous tax data – April 30, 2012
Apple to The New York Times: We are among the top payers of U.S. income tax – April 29, 2012
The New York Times: How Apple sidesteps billions in global taxes – April 28, 2012
The New York Times blows it, gets Apple CEO Tim Cook’s earnings spectacularly wrong – April 9, 2012
Why did The New York Times revise their ‘iPad modest changes’ article and neglect to inform their readers? – March 8, 2012
The New York Times continues idiotic vendetta, claims Apple’s new iPad only offers ‘modest changes’ – March 7, 2012
New York Times gets cold shoulder from Apple after negative reports – February 17, 2012
Rush Limbaugh: The New York Times has turned on Apple; they wouldn’t do this if Steve Jobs was alive – February 1, 2012
BSR: New York Times’ Apple-Foxconn article contains untruths, inaccuracies, and misleading info – January 29, 2012
Apple CEO Tim Cook calls New York Times supplier report ‘patently false and offensive’ – January 27, 2012
You just insulted buckets of warm piss everywhere.
The NY Slimes is at it again. Will they also earn a Pulitzer for burying the Benghazi story to help Obama get re-elected, or is that one shared by the entire news media?
Regardless of what you may think of their editorial pages, the NYT and the WSJ are two of the best papers in the business. Which is also to say, willful ignorance is not a virtue MDN.
This was a “news” series, not an “editorial.”
Apple CEO Tim Cook calls New York Times supplier report ‘patently false and offensive’ – January 27, 2012
And, NYT has nothing to do with “signs of changes” whatsoever.
Apple signed Fair Labour Association by Autumn of 2011 and announced that even better inspections will be held before that manipulative “report” by NYT.
I agree. I find the NYTimes to be better than most. IF they have to shut out the lights it will be because they expect people to pay $350/year just for digital access… oh, you get a physical paper, too, but most of us don’t want the physical. Give us a $99/year digital option and watch the numbers soar.
All I have to say Warbux is your eyes are closed and looking at HASBEENS is all to common, when you don’t keep up to moral beliefs and lose that form of decent integrity that is instilled in those beliefs and honest writing, it’s time to go and being what it once was is not an indication or proof that it is now.
As I said, junckmail story reporting better known as tabloid shock stories with a full dose of untruths dosnt keep a once great paper in that slot of integrity it once held.
MDN is correct in its comments, twisting lies has been and is what is needed for shock value for thoes stoneaged reportings and if a Pulitzer is awarded to those “best so called papers in the business” that have to create news instead of honest reporting, then you can have your lies and fabrications.
Enjoy your fantasy world and enjoy the fact that you have had your febrile induced mind manipulated by those so called “best papers in the business”.
A Pulitzer today has about as much meaning as the bucket of piss.. Thanks to crappy media reporting, most people are shamefully un-informed. And the NY Times is one of the leading propagandists.. Cannot wait for the headline in some other paper or website that they are “history”
Whats a Pulitzer?
/s
about a pound and a half
No, no, that’s a Henway!
The 1500 would be a kiloHenway? About half a firkin?
“most people are shamefully un-informed.”
should read,
“most people are
shamefullywillfully un-informed.And MDN’s childish take is added evidence.
8^þ is a liberal, incensed that one of the leading liberal mouthpieces is being exposed.
Don’t throw rocks, Fwhatever, when your own anointed mouthpieces have tripped over their tongues more times than I care to count. “Reporting” loses its meaning when the mouthpieces will stoop to great depths to twist and fabricate news to support their own viewpoints.
The fact is, the media mouthpieces from either extreme of the political spectrum do not represent the viewpoints of numerous Americans who hold much more moderate viewpoints and are fed up with the gridlock that is crippling this country. You and your ilk, Fwhatever, are prime contributors to the vitriol that fuels that gridlock. Therefore, your opinions are becoming increasingly marginalized as this country attempts to recover from the political cancer that was spawned in the late 1980s and early 1990s.
The New York Times is the Samsung of yellow urinalism.
sorta like Mel is the Salieri of MDN commenters.
Yet another reason to find a higher grade of bird cage liner
Mac Daily News – your comments on the New York Times are ignorant, childish, Right Wing Tea Party garbage – Your pitiful little site filled with information stolen from real journalists is daily proof of your unethical, uneducated, uninformed idiocy.
MDN is an important service. It lets us be informed about all that bullshit out there without having to give the bullshit writers clicks. That includes NYT.
I fully concur with the MDN take, and I’m definitely ‘left of center’. The NYT does the bidding of the slimy dirt balls who really run this country. Remember, it was the NYT who gave Judith Miller a prominent platform from which to ‘catapult the [pro-Iraq War] propaganda’!
How many issues of the NYT have you read cove to cover? answer – None! How long have you subscribed to the NYT? – answer – never! You hear of one article you don’t agree with and 150 years of world class journalism and 180 Pulitzer prizes all dismissed in your narrow, closed mind?
Had been reading the NYT since I was a teenager [but stopped a couple of years ago] and am now on the other side of 50.
Invested in AAPL prior to the launch of iPhone, so I’m particularly angry at the series of the anti- hatchet pieces the ‘gray lady’ has produced this year.
Exactly the same as Arnold. Just over 50, used to read and respect the NYT. However, as a long term investor in Apple, I have come to realize the agendas that motivate a once great paper.
Problem is you are so tainted to the lies you can’t see when you are being led to the slaughter!
Tflint, if you can’t see the fabrication of stories and still stick with that belief and really think throwing out political slurs make your case…..
Have to agree with the critics of the NYT. Having lived in Asia off and on for decades i find their coverage of China far below that of, say, FT or the Economist, with whom I also differ politically, but I respect their general insight and accuracy. The NYT lost me in its shameful drumbeat support for the Iraqi war. And their coverage of Apple and Foxconn in China has been embarrassing, compared to say Leslie Chang (TED talk) or Rob Schmitz (NPR marketplace).
Judy the mattress Miller who slept her way to the top
when NYT was taken over by the owner’s kids. NYT
was a great paper many,many years back. Chicago
Tribune also gone to the dumpster. We still have
the Washington Post as America’s last credible
newspaper. Combine the Post with the Economist
and the Guardian and you will have “all the news
that’s fit to print”
Tflint is a liberal, incensed that one of the leading liberal mouthpieces is being exposed.
The NYT is a gate-keeper, faux ‘liberal’ mouthpiece at best.
As taosbob mentions above, how could a genuine ‘liberal’ paper have ginned up the Iraq War?
Husseins lapdog. I don’t even use the rag to wipe my ass after my morning bog.
Apple announced its own worker’s rights investigation and plans for reforms before the first Times hit piece ever ran. It’s been obvious the Times was going for a Pulitzer with this two-faced series feigning concern for worker’s rights in Asia. And yet, the newspaper company relies heavily upon freelancers to avoid paying benefits to journalists who might otherwise be on staff and it grossly underpays those third-party contractors. The Times –and most metropolitan newspapers — hasn’t raised freelance payments for at least 30 years (no kidding) and just a few years ago, even attempted a copyright grab of freelancer’s work that it eventually lost in a landmark Supreme Court decision (Tasini v New York Times. After that loss, it forced freelancers to sign away all rights to their work in order to get assignments. Today, if you do freelance writing or photography for the Times, that company can re-sell your work in competition against you! That’s an incredibly bad deal for any freelancer.
When it comes to workers rights, The New York Times Company would do well to write a series about its own significant shortcomings .
And what about Saturday Night Live, talk about a liberal mouthpiece! Did you see that hackjob piece they did about Chinese workers? And they dared to criticize Apple, which proves they’re liberal, and therefore the enemy.
MDN Nailed it. MDN’s take cleverly describes the truth in a very witty way as it normally does. The NY Times is not a source of journalism. It is not a “Newspaper.” It is a liberal propaganda machine bar none.
Fans of the NY Times are typically left leaning because the paper is openly leftist. They’ve admitted it more than once. Media studies have shown this to be true. Reaction to criticizing the paper is usually swift, vocal, vitriolic and sometimes violently charged, as with all criticism of anything on the left.
Criticize the NY Times and you are an ignorant racist homophobe who should be killed in one horrible way or another.
Interestingly, with the series of articles on Apple, even leftists had to blink a few times because the paper’s normal methods of manufacturing “truth” were exposed to them. The NY Times, the Moses/Bible of leftist gospel, was essentially calling Apple an evil child exploiting, (gasp) “BUSINESS?”
Any person with a rational mind could see what was going on. Apple was being singled out precisely because she is Apple. In other words, Apple was being singled out because she possessed the one attribute leftists despise more than any other, success. In this way the belief that if you are wealthy, it is at the expense of someone else, is maintained. In doing so the NY Times even explains their own failure, with the popular leftist credo, “You are rich because you are evil, we are poor because we are good.”
The NY Times even went so far as to attempt to make the people who work in Apple Stores appear to be one step above slaves. The highly acclaimed Apple Stores were the perfect target. One can always find disgruntled employees, even the angels grumble behind god’s back. Just ask Satan.
The Times rode the idea that Apple Store employees were underpaid, overworked and somehow single handedly responsible for Apple’s success. Another exploitation angle. Anyone who shops at an Apple Store knows that most of the time you see a sea of Apple polo shirts just hanging around while customers browse. Most of the people who go into the store already know what they want and the primary duty handled by the the store employees is going to get the box. When you walk into an Apple Store that iPad is already sold. I mean for crying out loud, there’s nothing else in there to buy! You’re not going to leave with a Galaxy Tablet!
Still the Times ran with the idea that comparative sales figures and salaries of clothing stores was somehow PROOF of Apple’s evil exploitation, and much to my chagrin, Apple responded with giving everyone raises. Sadly Apple danced to the puppet master’s tune through all of this.
Never mind the fact that people working for Apple receive outstanding benefits including medical from day one. Never mind that people line up for those jobs because the training and experience is an excellent stepping stone to better and higher paying jobs. Never mind that one of the chief benefits is price cuts of Apple products. Never mind that a large chunk of the public takes that “Genius” title seriously.
Never mind all of it. Apple was exploiting their people.
If you are still a fan of the Times, you go back and read those articles. You should also keep them in mind whenever they run similar articles on any subject matter. Remember who you are trusting. The Times is a business with a highly opinionated constituency, and they will pander to that constituency at all costs, truth be damned, because that’s where their money is.
One can always find disgruntled employees, even the angels grumble behind god’s back. Just ask Satan.
———————–
This a gem of a truth. Even Satan does quote the Bible but with a twisted angle, and the New York Times slimeball serpent mixes half-truths with page clicks as its motivator. What a fall from its pinnacle. Ask Lucifer.
Brilliant analysis.
Going after the big business world dog is a way to get the attention of the Pulitzer judges and not a bad strategy, but certainly a self-serving selective one.
The NYT investigative journalists are not looking into the “fast and furious” debacle where our government supplied guns to mexican drug lords resulting in the death of a U.S. Border Patrol agent. Just imagine the uproar if a Republican was in office. The calls for resignation, impeachment, etc. 24/7 non-stop on all mainstream media outlets.
One more. The NYT investigative journalists are not asking Hillary about Benghazi hearings and the claim of blame on a bad movie. Again, imagine a Republican doing the same and the relentless media hounding that followed.
Fortunately for the fair minded, we all know what NYT stands for and stands against.
Truth be damned indeed, TMac. That’s why journalism and the NYT should not be allowed in the same sentence. As you pointed out, they don’t even attempt to hide their bias any longer.
After you win your Apple Pulitzer — trumpet an announcement to all employees that worked on the story and are now unemployed:
http://www.businessinsider.com/why-new-york-times-is-firing-more-journalists-charts-2012-12?op=1
Here’s an interesting take from Forbes, which those whining about MDN’s attitude to the NYT really ought to read.
How about conditions improving because of capitalist market forces, instead of crusading journalism…
Apple’s Foxconn Factories Are Getting Better
http://www.forbes.com/sites/timworstall/2012/12/27/apples-foxconn-factories-are-getting-better/
Probably less than a fraction of 1 percent of China’s manufacturing workers deal with Apple.
Apple’s rivals got 90+% of the PC market, 100% of TVs, 99% of monitors, 100% of Printers, 95% of cell phones etc.
Microsoft, Google, Dell, HP etc all manufacture in China for years. Samsung which they proudly claim sell a lot more phones than Apple has numerous plants in China and have been cited with using child labour (unlike the handful out of thousands in Foxconn Apple lines who sneaked in fake I,Ds, China labour orgs say some Samsung factories have 50% underaged workers). Many claim that if you count all the divisions like appliances Samsung is larger than Apple.
The China press say that the conditions in Apple’s rivals are much worse. Workers for example remove gold from circuit boards with mecury with no gloves or other protection etc.
Yet NYT does not bother criticizing the others even to a fraction of the hate they spew at apple in spite of the fact Apple is LEADING in worker rights. If NYT was really interested in protecting workers shouldn’t they be concerned with the 99% of the workers more instead of the less than 1% who work for Apple? (but of course writing about the others won’t help sell papers)
which of Apple’s rivals open up their labour audits on their webpage or invite third party labour orgs like FLA to snoop around? Yet NYT singles out apple to crucify.
For YEARS (over a decade) PC makers have been selling made in china cheap PCs, netbooks and more recently BOGO android phones. Why was NYT silent ? For 10 years did they think $250 PC netbooks were built in Paradise factories?
NYT is just slime and will slant the news just to make money, Writing about the 99% who work in much worse conditions doesn’t sell papers so they don’t give a rats azz so they slant the news on the 1% which leads in worker protection Apple.
” because the public can finally see right through you”
If the “public” had the capability to see thru anything, Fox News would have been run out in a rail and the US wouldn’t be in Iraq.
Why would the American public run out the one news network not attached by the lips to Obama’s anus?
It’s precisely because so many can see right through the leftist sympathizers that FOX News dominates the cable news ratings.