NYT has been lying and making up crap for a long time

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Not sure how I came to it, but I took an interest in Kitty Genovese, who was stabbed to death and raped in NYC in 1964. The New York Times "reported" that 37 or 38 (they couldn't even decide which number to lie about) people heard her being attacked and killed, but did nothing. They didn't want to get involved.

This was a lie.

Like, not even an embellishment - it was a flat out lie.

The truth is that only a few of her neighbors even heard the initial attack, and they thought it was just a couple of drunks or a lovers spat. One man did interpret it as an attack and yelled out the window, making the attacker run away. Several people called the police to report a disturbance. One neighbor went out to investigate and found Kitty dying. NYT's "bystander effect", that prompted investigations and studies, was a flat lie.

So yeah, nothing new with these press liars.
 

Midnightrider

Well-Known Member
Not sure how I came to it, but I took an interest in Kitty Genovese, who was stabbed to death and raped in NYC in 1964. The New York Times "reported" that 37 or 38 (they couldn't even decide which number to lie about) people heard her being attacked and killed, but did nothing. They didn't want to get involved.

This was a lie.

Like, not even an embellishment - it was a flat out lie.

The truth is that only a few of her neighbors even heard the initial attack, and they thought it was just a couple of drunks or a lovers spat. One man did interpret it as an attack and yelled out the window, making the attacker run away. Several people called the police to report a disturbance. One neighbor went out to investigate and found Kitty dying. NYT's "bystander effect", that prompted investigations and studies, was a flat lie.

So yeah, nothing new with these press liars.
Well it's a good thing president trump gets his intel from the NYT :killingme
 

PrchJrkr

Long Haired Country Boy
Ad Free Experience
Patron
I guess you missed that interview last week where trump said he got his wife tapping intel from the NYT.
REALITY, as foreign as it might seem to you, is not a mental disorder. :yay:

I'd tap his wife in a heartbeat. She's a hottie.
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
I guess you missed that interview last week where trump said he got his wife tapping intel from the NYT.

Your somewhat amusing typo aside, of course I didn't miss the interview. I, unlike you, actually listen to Trump directly instead of scanning the rags every morning to find out what blather I should spew on the interwebz that day.

Not sure what point you're trying to make. That Trump shouldn't read the NYT or take anything they print seriously because they hillaryclinton like a rug? I agree with that, but we can discuss those surveillance accusations if you want, and figure out how they got all that information, including transcripts of private phone calls. It should be in a different thread, though, because this one is about how the NYT has a long history of making #### up out of thin air.
 

littlelady

God bless the USA
Not sure how I came to it, but I took an interest in Kitty Genovese, who was stabbed to death and raped in NYC in 1964. The New York Times "reported" that 37 or 38 (they couldn't even decide which number to lie about) people heard her being attacked and killed, but did nothing. They didn't want to get involved.

This was a lie.

Like, not even an embellishment - it was a flat out lie.

The truth is that only a few of her neighbors even heard the initial attack, and they thought it was just a couple of drunks or a lovers spat. One man did interpret it as an attack and yelled out the window, making the attacker run away. Several people called the police to report a disturbance. One neighbor went out to investigate and found Kitty dying. NYT's "bystander effect", that prompted investigations and studies, was a flat lie.

So yeah, nothing new with these press liars.

The fact that De Blasio is mayor warrants no further questions. Did anyone ever notice his middle name is Wilhem? :lol: Obviously, Bill wasn't mayor at the time, but do y'all see a pattern here?
 
Last edited:

Larry Gude

Strung Out
After reading the wiki on this incident, and pondering any number of time the press has embellished a story, the NYT or any other source, there is an argument to be made that, perhaps, the decision was made by the press, be it editors, reporters or what have you, that it might serve the public good if people were jolted into being a little more aware of one another. Read the wiki I provided and then consider the Times approach to this. And then think of any number of alarmist stories that, even being total fabrications, may well have served the public interest. Once you've read the story of Winston Mosley, the man who murdered Kitty, and ponder his extensive rap sheet prior and what he'd did AFTER, clearly, he operated in a culture that was certainly not TOO nosey.

So, to me, this boils down to a question of public good. Is it OK to exaggerate for a good? Keep in mind, the Times story was true in that SOME people ignored her killing. They have their reasons and perhaps some are plenty valid. However, does anyone really doubt that at least some of the folks who chose to ignore it did so because they simply didn't care or didn't want to get involved?

Again, read the wiki if you can handle that sort of ugliness and put yourself in context of a paper and a reporter and editor and the fact that Kitty was only one of 636 murders in NYC in 1963 http://www.nytimes.com/1998/12/24/nyregion/homicides-decline-below-1964-level-in-new-york-city.html of note;
It is difficult to compare how other crimes measure up to 1964 levels because the Police Department overhauled its counting methods in 1966, charging that ''self-serving'' police officials had undercounted crimes other than homicide for several years. So the official 1964 levels, which experts believe are artificially low,

So, if you're the Times and people are starting to grumble that the cops don't even keep proper track of the violence, is it bad to cry a little wolf when, in fact, the wolves are out there and killing and raping?
 

vraiblonde

Board Mommy
PREMO Member
Patron
Is it OK to exaggerate for a good?

No.

#1, it's not their job. #2, as they say, "A lie isn't a side of the story. It's just a lie."

It's nice of you to try and put a positive spin on their lies, but its unlikely there's any altruism at work. More likely it was sensationalism to sell papers.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
No.

#1, it's not their job. #2, as they say, "A lie isn't a side of the story. It's just a lie."

It's nice of you to try and put a positive spin on their lies, but its unlikely there's any altruism at work. More likely it was sensationalism to sell papers.

Had you read the link you'd have a different view.
 

Larry Gude

Strung Out
Larry, I posted that link in my original post.

You didn't read it. Clearly. Because it all but makes the point I was making, that a meeting between the chief and the editor expressed serious concerns about folks really not paying enough attention.
 
Top