Mass Shooting Fallout: NY Times Changes Headline Deemed Too Favorable to Trump After Leftist Freakout
Cory Booker griped: “Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT.”
The New York Times published a piece on President Donald Trump’s response to the two deadly shootings with the title TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM.
The newspaper used the correct headline because that’s exactly what Trump said in his speech. However, it went against the leftist narrative’s to push gun control even though they demanded Trump condemn white supremacy.
The left and Democratic candidates blasted The New York Times, which changed the headline to appease them.
From Fox News on Monday (emphasis mine):
“In one voice, our nation must condemn racism, bigotry and white supremacy,” Trump said, in solemn remarks from the White House, standing beside Vice President Pence. “These sinister ideologies must be defeated. Hatred has no place in America.”
The president notably did not call for explicit changes to gun laws beyond red flag laws, despite tweeting earlier Monday morning about the possibility of linking background check legislation to immigration reform. However, he said he is open and ready to listen to ideas “that will actually work.”
The president also called for “cultural” changes, citing violent video games. Further, Trump said he has directed the Justice Department to propose legislation ensuring that those commit hate crimes and mass murders “face the death penalty and that this capital punishment be delivered quickly, decisively, and without years of needless delay.”
So Trump condemned hatred just as the left demanded. He did not mention gun control in his response, but he tweeted about his openness to listen to ideas that might actually work.
As you can tell The New York Times used the correct headline on its story about Trump’s response. That’s what we want, right? A fair media that reports stories with the facts.
I guess the left does not feel that way because they unloaded on The New York Times. How dare the largest publication in our country not spin a story or headline against Trump! How dare the newspaper not push their gun control narrative!
Tomorrow’s NYT print edition.
Not sure “TRUMP URGES UNITY VS. RACISM” is how I would have framed the story. pic.twitter.com/quOibXsp32
— Nate Silver (@NateSilver538) August 6, 2019
Unbelievable. https://t.co/rLgaacttDS
— Beto O’Rourke (@BetoORourke) August 6, 2019
Actually, Senator, that is EXACTLY what Trump said.
That’s not what happened. https://t.co/m6eIZOARcZ
— Kirsten Gillibrand (@SenGillibrand) August 6, 2019
Now it’s up to The New York Times to save people?
Lives literally depend on you doing better, NYT. Please do. https://t.co/L4CpCb8zLi
— Cory Booker (@CoryBooker) August 6, 2019
Mayor, The New York Times published the truth.
Hey, @nytimes — what happened to “The Truth Is Worth It?”
Not the truth.
Not worth it. pic.twitter.com/N5tMTEoLln— Bill de Blasio (@BilldeBlasio) August 6, 2019
How did The New York Times aid white supremacy with this headline, Congresswoman!?
Let this front page serve as a reminder of how white supremacy is aided by – and often relies upon – the cowardice of mainstream institutions. https://t.co/ynjgtT66yI
— Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez (@AOC) August 6, 2019
I cannot even with these people. So of course The New York Times cowered and changed the headline to fit the narrative.
Tomorrow’s @nytimes tonight, second edition: @realDonaldTrump assails hate but not guns; China employs currency in trade feud, jolting markets. #nytimes pic.twitter.com/1fD4pVEbaF
— Tom Jolly (@TomJolly) August 6, 2019
Cowards. I’m not a fan of Trump, but my goodness. The Trump Derangement Syndrome is so old and tiring.
DONATE
Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.
Comments
they need to have a obit for the free press, it died very young
All The News That’s Fit To Print – according to our readers.
Is that ‘newspaper’ a joke, or what? If it weren’t for the ny times’ defense of the genocideal government in the soviet union, it’d be funny.
From the whore – er – horses’ own mouth:
NY Times: Times Should Lose Pulitzer From 30’s:
https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/23/us/times-should-lose-pulitzer-from-30-s-consultant-says.html
Methinks they’re the “ONION NEW YORK TIMES – FIT TO BE FRIED.”
It was “murdered” by leftists.
How The Media Inspires Mass Shooters.
As reported on Ammoland.com:
A paper presented to the American Psychological Association found the number of mass killings, rampage killings or “mass shootings”, may be doubled by irresponsible media aggrandizement of mass killers. The desire for fame was found to be one of the main motivators of these rampage killers.
Even the far left publication ‘Mother Jones’ has detailed How The Media Inspires Mass Shooters. It’s to their cynical advantage to do this for several reasons. First, they get to grandstand with images of the scene of the shooting, droning endlessly on about the perpetrator and their possible motive, providing hours of live commentary and analysis. Second, all of this is but a virtue signalling telethon for their ratings, where they get to show how much they care whilst condemning 120 million innocent people for not wanting to give up their civil rights. Third, they can incessantly push the national socialist Left’s final solution to the Liberty problem with discussions of how fast and how soon the guns of innocent people should be confiscated for the ‘heinous’ crime of wanting to be able to protect themselves.
Can we finally admit that trying to control Liberty doesn’t work and that societal violence isn’t caused by the ‘easy access to guns’?
Over the weekend, we had two mass murder shootings in bastions of Liberty Control – and all the legislation, regulation and gun confiscation SWATing failed to work as advertised.
The aphorism that insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results certainly applies to the Liberty grabbers on the Left in this instance. No sooner did the gunfire die down that the usual suspects began calling for even stricter controls on the lives of millions of innocent people.
The Authoritarian Socialist Left clearly doesn’t want to admit the truth, but the fact is violence can occur in places with strict limitations on Liberty. With or without firearms, this is clearly a societal problem that won’t be solved even with more draconian restrictions on freedom.
Why didn’t mass murder shootings take place in the 1870’s?
It has been already proven that repeating or multiple shot firearms existed long before the writing of the US Constitution. Later advancements in cartridge ammunition and machine tools produced some of the most common place handguns of the time from the 1870’s and beyond.
The American civil war spurred the development of a number of weapon technologies from Lever action rifles and revolvers to the Gatling Gun. Were the problem of societal violence and school shootings merely caused by the ‘easy access to guns’ there should have been an accompanying explosion in these types of attacks during this time. Where are the multitudes of news reports of these tragedies? They don’t exist because these didn’t become a problem until over a century later.
Why didn’t mass murder shootings with semiautomatic firearms take place in the 1890’s?
Semiautomatic firearms were developed later in the 19th Century in the 1890’s beginning with the first semiautomatic pistol in 1892. By the dawn of the 20th century, these types of firearms were firmly established. Again, if the problem of societal violence and school shootings merely caused by the ‘easy access’ to these types of guns, there should have been an accompanying explosion in these types of attacks during this time. The fact is, It would take another 70 years before this phenomenon would emerge.
If Guns were the problem:
There would have been attacks with revolvers from the 1870’s onward.
There would have been attacks with semiautomatics from the 1900’s onward.
If it truly was an issue of the ‘easy access to guns’ these kinds of attacks should have taken place more than 100 years ago. Similarly, if strict controls on Liberty were the answer, these types of attacks, there wouldn’t take place with severe limitations on Liberty such as the UK, Japan, China, Australia and in the states.
The Liberty Grabber Left loves to imply that ‘safety’ is merely one step away, all we have to do is pass their most recent scheme to restrict our basic human rights and individual freedoms. It doesn’t matter that said measure won’t work as advertised. That is a feature, not a bug. Abject failure on their part means they can give it a go one more time to amass even more power for themselves. Never mind that said failure means that people have died. They merely blame their failures on someone else with hyperbolic invective that their political enemies have blood on their hands for the ‘crime’ wanting to keep their basic human rights.
If it’s not the ‘easy access to guns’ then it has to be something else, something that has changed in the past 40 years or so. This would be what the national socialist Left and the media [but we repeat ourselves] have done to the culture and what the media have done to encourage these attacks. Tom Knighton over at Bearing Arms also noted that recent years have seen a severe uptick in societal violence, long after repeating and semiautomatic firearms became ubiquitous. The Left in general has been the cause of societal violence, however, there are some prime examples of their culpability in this issue that we will cite as examples.
How The Media Inspires Mass Shooters.
As reported on Ammoland.com:
A paper presented to the American Psychological Association found the number of mass killings, rampage killings or “mass shootings”, may be doubled by irresponsible media aggrandizement of mass killers. The desire for fame was found to be one of the main motivators of these rampage killers.
Even the far left publication ‘Mother Jones’ has detailed How The Media Inspires Mass Shooters. It’s to their cynical advantage to do this for several reasons. First, they get to grandstand with images of the scene of the shooting, droning endlessly on about the perpetrator and their possible motive, providing hours of live commentary and analysis. Second, all of this is but a virtue signalling telethon for their ratings, where they get to show how much they care whilst condemning 120 million innocent people for not wanting to give up their civil rights. Third, they can incessantly push the national socialist Left’s final solution to the Liberty problem with discussions of how fast and how soon the guns of innocent people should be confiscated for the ‘heinous’ crime of wanting to be able to protect themselves.
It’s always a win-win for the media, for they aren’t going to be the ones to be endangered by gun confiscation. They will always have their armed security and bodyguards, who cares about the proles who don’t have such luxuries. They encourage more attacks, making the perpetrators infamous and they reap the benefits, why should they be concerned with actually solving the problem? The same holds true for the rest of the nation’s socialist Left – their policies cause and encourage these attacks, why shouldn’t they reap the benefits in more power and prestige?
https://noqreport.com/2019/07/31/proving-lefts-war-culture-morality-cause-societal-violence/
Darn that copy and paste went wild.
And they need to start calling their fake news in kind political contributions to the democrats and including it in their accounting of donations and expenditures.
Well, the democrat press died. There are a lot of alternatives, proved by the fact of Trump’s election in the face of the democrat media propaganda machine.
In summary:
-the democrat media exists SOLELY as a political tool of indoctrination and misinformation.
-The GOP media doesn’t exist. It should. But then, what do we expect from these sell-out losers.
-New media and radio shows are where you can get accurate information.
God they are all the same and I imagine most tune them out
So how does this work, the first publication actually went to press and sold and then they do the same story with a different headline?
How does that work?
Newspapers publish several editions, and stories change from one edition to the next.
Name an instance in American history where a newspaper changed its headline in response to a protest by a fringe group of a political party.
Nobody can, except now.
When I first read about there being a headline change, I expected something blatantly idiotic (for example, antisemitic-Netanyahu-dog-cartoon-bad.) But when I read the original headline I kept thinking – what am I missing? Where is the wrongness? I read it over and over.
It took me a while to realize there was no wrongness and that the freak out was over the #@$%! accuracy.
Normal people cannot reconcile with the left. The left must be politically destroyed.
The neo-Maoists are convinced that this is their hour and feel that it’s now or never.
So at what point does the Left address the lives lost each and every day in the cities of America due to gang violence? Just in Chicago, last weekend, there were several “mass shootings”. Except these weren’t politically opportunistic, I guess. Just life in the ‘hood. https://heyjackass.com/
They’re like the Palestinians. They don’t care about saving themselves, only about hurting others (whites, Jews respectively).
“The president notably did not call for explicit changes to gun laws beyond red flag laws …”
And in other news:
New York City did not experience an electrical blackout yesterday.
Times Square is still above sea level.
King Kong was not observed on or anywhere near The Empire State Building.
New York Times reporters did not observe the president acting psychotically.
Why would journalists limit themselves to reporting news that actually happened, when there are always so many more things that did not happen that they might tell us about?
And barry obama was a Constitutional law professor.
And michelle obama is a fashion icon.
And hillary clinton is the world’s smartest woman.
And so forth.
I love a good unmasking. Yet another blatant example of media bias which my lefty musician friends categorically deny.
“Bias?” Man, that ship has sailed. “Corruption” is where we’re at.
This irresponsible and obscene display of overt partisanship will no doubt turn out to be a remarkable gift for the Master, Trump.
Why does anyone pay attention to the NYT? I swear they get more traffic from angry offended Conservatives than from anyone who actually wants news. (Those people go to Fox, after all)
People who read the ny times fancy themselves as quite erudite and well-informed.
In truth, they’ve allowed themselves to become ignorant rubes.
Pravda without the truth. Not even subtle.
The editors at Pravda Times momentarily strayed from the Dhimmi-crat narrative, and, from their obligation to perpetually promote the Dhimmis’ agenda with unwavering fealty. Of course, these kulaks were soon set straight by an outcry from the histrionic Dhimmi-crat faithful.
The original-title paper is currently on the rack in Portland.
More hysterical leftist nonsense, that’s all the NYTimes is now, and this proves it beyond a doubt. Great catch!
They’re to be laughed at, over and over, so everyone knows what they did.