About the lack of coverage by the NYT of the protests....

[senseandsensibility]

It might be even worse than you thought. According to Joseph Menn on bluesky, "I count 49 news headlines on mobile app home page right now, not including opinion, sports or cooking. None of them are about the massive protests yesterday."

I like this comment from Alexis Madrigal as well, "This is gotta be intentional. But it's also just weird! How many NYT readers were at protests? What % of subscribers? A substantial %! How can it not be seen as newsworthy, especially given the readership?"

The NYT is not ignoring the protests because they are not newsworthy. That is self evident. And they are not ignoring them because their readers aren't interested. In fact, ignoring them will almost certainly decrease their number of paid subscribers. To me, it is obvious they are ignoring them for ideological purposes. And that really, really, blows.

[SheltieLover]

1. People should unsubscribe imo & tell they why

[senseandsensibility]

2. Agree, but so many have already over their coverage of Biden

They seemed determined.

[SheltieLover]

3. Kissing kraznov's fat ass is unacceptable

[jrthin]

19. Obviously not enough. It's hard to write stories when you're out of business.

We are the consumers. We stop consuming they are out of business. It's simply math.

[SheltieLover]

42. Imagine if half the 12.5 mill protesters & 2 or 3 friends

or family members canceled and told them why they canceled.

I don't have a subscription, but I'd not give them 2-cents for their rag.

Supporting kraznov is supporting a trsi traitor. A ruskie asset imo.

Never gonna happen here.

[DENVERPOPS]

49. Count me in

as un-subscribing during their choice of coverage/non coverage during Biden, and one article that was off the wall, super inflammatory towards Biden, and hyper Trump loving..

[NNadir]

17. I have been done with the NY Times ever since it was clear it was a Pro Trump rag. It went from "All the News Fit...

...to Print" to "All the Spin Unworthy of Print."

I was a subscriber for close to 50 years, but I'm done.

[littlemissmartypants]

22. Hear! Hear!

[InAbLuEsTaTe]

37. I'm with you, though you did beat me to the punch by a few years... good for you!!

[Conjuay]

78. All the news that fits, we print.

[Seinan Sensei]

80. All the fits that's news to print

[littlemissmartypants]

20. And..

Stop posting their shit here and never click on their links again!! Search the archives first if absolutely necessary but don't give them the traffic directly.

They are tracking readership even if one isn't a subscriber.

We no longer have viable journalism in this country and it's damn scary, SL. I hate it.



❤️

[paleotn]

59. I get it. They've been threatened and have no courage.

Compared to our past, what passes for the press these days is generally beyond pathetic. Overpaid yappers and scribblers worried about their 6,7 and 8 figure salaries. Then again, much of the yapping class particularly has no stake in democracy. They could still make a bundle working for the US version of RT. Look a the Fux News jackasses.

[SheltieLover]

66. Yup spineless harlots

No offense to sex workers intended.

[comradebillyboy]

4. Geez, even Bezos' WP had a huge story

on the protests this morning. And Jeff's nose is pretty brown from kissing Trump's ass this year.

[senseandsensibility]

5. Glad to hear that

Just shows how bad the NYT coverage is if it makes Bezos look good!

[spooky3]

8. Yesterday WaPo had a headline iirc that claimed

“Thousands” of Americans were attending the rallies. Not “millions” or even “hundreds of thousands.” Earlier last week they projected “huge crowds” at the parade. What bs. But they improved their coverage today.

[senseandsensibility]

11. I actually saw a headline on nbc.com yesterday that said

that there were "scores" of protestors. Scores? Unless I'm confused, isn't a score 20? I mean, how stupid. I almost started a thread about it, but I decided I wanted to concentrate on the positive yesterday.

[spooky3]

25. Ridiculous! Nt

[SheltieLover]

45. I don't think they can bring themsrlves to be truthful.

Sick fucks.

[littlemissmartypants]

24. The WAPO article still sucks. It was nowhere close to journalism.

I looked at part of it.

It's a facade.

[BattleRow]

44. Heard he (Bezos) had to begin breathing through his ears these days.

Last edited Mon Jun 16, 2025, 03:30 PM - Edit history (1)

[stillcool]

6. I have never gotten past Judith Miller

and that 'out west where the aspens turn in clusters because their roots connect them', or however it went.

[Kid Berwyn]

7. Paper of Record...

...Distraction in Service of Kakistocrats, Kleptocrats and Oligarchs.

Sad. And people will remember for a long time after Orange Shitgibbon is history.

[Takket]

9. can confirm... and this makes me furious..........

i just went to their homepage, NOTHING about the protests..........

BUT........... they had this.........

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/15/travel/europe-tourism-protests.html

They are covering protests in EUROPE about tourism, and NOT covering mass protests HERE!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Fucking corrupt pieces of shit.

[senseandsensibility]

14. Thanks for the confirmation

Their willingness to cover protests in Europe and not in their own backyard speaks volumes.

[Cha]

10. The NYT was very weak reporting on

the Protests Around the World and in New York City When "The world Says No to War" on Feb 15, 2003. In 20 degree weather.

I know.. I was there.. and when I cancelled my subscription to the NYT.

Wonder if WaPo Ignored the No Kings Protests & the LA Times?

Mahalo

[senseandsensibility]

12. I remember that Cha.

You're right. This is a decades long pattern. And of course, more recently their coverage of Biden was absolutely atrocious.

[Cha]

15. Also their coverage of Hillary and their

Drum beat for the War on Iraq with Judy Miller.

The NYT is Unamerican. And all the Papers that promote Fascism by Covering up and Ignoring the Actual News of what's going on in America to Counteract it. They're insane.

[RockRaven]

13. Also weak on the Nazis in the 1930s. This isn't an isolated thing, this is who NYT is deep down.

[Zorro]

16. Just cancelled my subscription

No NYT reporting at all on yesterday's "No Kings" protest.

[SheltieLover]

46. Good for you!

I hope you told them why!

[maxsolomon]

84. Saturday afternoon events are rarely covered in the Sunday edition.

But you sure showed them!

[Zorro]

85. Well I guess that excuses them!

There were only reportedly over 5 million protesters on Saturday, but it seems that wasn't very significant to you or them to cover in their Sunday edition.

[senseandsensibility]

86. Yet they were still covering the "perade" on Sunday

Funny how that works.

[maxsolomon]

88. They DID cover the protests.

Just not in the amount or the way DU specifies. The NYT will never satisfy DU's critics.

[bif]

89. The endless whining about the NYT gets tired after a while

It's still one of the best papers in print. I look forward to getting the Sunday edition every week.

[senseandsensibility]

90. You find it tiresome

Okay. Many DUers on this thread don't, and have given reasons why. Perhaps instead of calling names, you'd like to list reasons and examples of good reporting by the Times. Or better yet, you could start a thread about it. I promise not to jump into your thread with no other contribution except to call it "tiresome" and accuse you of whining. Deal?

[bif]

92. I didn't call anyone any names.

And I'm not getting into a catfight. The infighting gets to me as well.

[Paladin]

91. Speak for yourself.

Given the NYT's non-stop trashing of Democrats since the presidential campaign, their profound lack of coverage of the national demonstrations is unconscionable. I say that without any satisfaction---I can remember when the NYT was a respectable paper, rather than a collection of trump apologists.

[Paladin]

18. I would expect no better from the present-day NY Times.

The editorial department has been pimping for trump since the presidential campaign---letting him off easy, over and over again, while engaged in non-stop trashing of Democrats. I'd call it sad---if it weren't so destructive and infuriating.

[Iamscrewed]

21. $

Follow the money.

[Botany]

35. Yup ... the rich and Russia support him and his agenda.

Last edited Sun Jun 15, 2025, 08:09 PM - Edit history (1)

If we had a legitimate press that reported the facts a convicted felon, serial sexual assaulter,
with multiple bankruptcies and failed businesses, who works for Putin, takes bribes, and is
burning America to the ground would never had been close to the White House.

[SheltieLover]

47. Avsolutely!

[JoseBalow]

23. What is the NYT spin on this omission?

Have they commented on why they are ignoring it?

[senseandsensibility]

28. Considering the amount of pushback they have been receiving for

quite a while now, I have been surprised at their lack of justification for their actions. Didn't they fire their "readers' representative" or whatever they used to call him or her a while back? There used to be someone who would respond to questions in writing about their coverage not too long ago.

[c-rational]

26. Completely agree. Their lack of coverage is intentional, and that is newsworthy. We cancelled years

ago - 2016/2017 but it has taken a while to realize how dastardly they have played the game. It is now more than obvious to anyone looking.

I would also like to see a true count of the the no kings protest. I do believe we exceeded the 3.5% threshold or 12+ million.

[muriel_volestrangler]

27. Looking at archive.org, they did cover "No Kings" at first

It was on their front page around 0900 GMT (0500 EDT) this morning (the latest archive taken). But has since then disappeared; that seems fast to disappear, when the Pope's video message in Chicago, and the DC parade, other events around the same time on Saturday, are still there.

[senseandsensibility]

34. Thanks for those details.

Why get rid of the headlines about the protests but not the ones about the parade?

[scipan]

64. Maybe they got a phone call... nt

[Godot51]

29. The failure of the media

It's not a recent occurrence but it is growing more and more prevalent and more and more noticeable that the media has it's own agenda, or has it's own interests, or has an obtuse owner, editor or staff who pick and choose the news as if they were making it rather than reporting it.

[Brenda]

30. I did a quick google about No Kings Protests and saw this:

As Top Stories there are headlines from CNN (no size), Wash Post (big crowds), USA Today (big crowds), NYT (no size), CBS (no size).

Then I see BBC: Mass Protests against Trump across the US as...

Clearly the US media is suppressing the truth to the American people while sane washing his North Korean birthday parade.

It's bothered me for a long time that I trust I'm reading more truth about my country in The Guardian than any American paper.

[Alice Kramden]

48. The Guardian UK is my go-to

No paywall, excellent and accurate reporting

[Brenda]

50. Yes, especially for environmental news.

In addition to political news.

Why the fuck? I mean, I know it's money, the billionaire repuke owners of the media, but still?

What is their endgame with ignoring or downplaying all of this destruction?

[mwf]

31. The most reliable newspaper

Is, oddly, The Christian Science Monitor, imo. Here’s a link to their coverage:

https://www.csmonitor.com/USA/Politics/2025/0614/military-parade-trump-protests

[Silent Type]

32. Search under "NYT No Kings," you'll get a bunch of hits including this one.

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/14/us/protests-cities-no-kings.html

[femmedem]

33. Yesterday afternoon and evening their protest coverage was prominent on their website.

Also, in the early evening, even their headline about Trump's parade included a mention of the protests. Today, the top two parade stories are "Close Trump Allies Sponsored the Military Parade, Raising Ethical Concerns" and "Trump’s Parade Drafted the Army Into a War of Images:
After a week of stunning and sobering TV-news scenes, the brassy Trumpy production was a surreal viewing experience."

I have no problem with how they've covered King's Day or the military parade.

[Evolve Dammit]

36. Seems self evident. Good post

[OldSWODog]

38. my humble recommendation for a newspaper

The Manchester Guardian seems to provide more than adequate coverage of most international news fairly thorough coverage of the US and the rest of the western hemisphere. I feel quite well informed for a very reasonable price ($15.15 per month) for online access.
I gave up on NYT and WaPo well over a year ago. Today I'm resting these old man feet. Best of regards to my fellow DUers...cheers, OSD

[flamingdem]

39. Same with CNN - yesterdays news?

What news is there to report that they didn't yesterday?

The numbers might be one thing but that might not be clear yet.

[senseandsensibility]

43. The protests became yesterday's news much more quickly

than the parade, it seems.

[flamingdem]

70. Totally true!

I agree the mainstream media is uncomfortable with the masses. They go to the usual suspects - Trump, war and celebrities, sigh.

[AdamGG]

40. Every network seemed to be showing the military parade without any critical commentary

I was with my mom, who lives in a memory care facility. I switched through ABC, NBC & CBS news stations on cable and they were all showing hours of coverage of the military parade without any mention of the day's No Kings protests. The only images they seemed to switch to, other than the parade, were buildings in Israel that had been hit by missiles.

[senseandsensibility]

41. Thanks for that insight

I wonder what those stations were showing earlier before the parade. Were they showing live coverage of the protests?

[AdamGG]

71. Good question

I could have missed it, but all I remember seeing earlier was images of police and protesters in LA.

[ailsagirl]

51. I just googled "why didn't nyt cover no kings protests"

And this popped up:

The New York Times has reported on the "No Kings" protests, which were a series of nationwide demonstrations held to protest what organizers viewed as President Trump's authoritarian policies. The protests occurred on the same day as a military parade in Washington, D.C. celebrating the Army's 250th anniversary and Trump's 79th birthday.
The New York Times published a live updates piece that discussed the protests extensively, detailing the scope of the events, their purpose, and the atmosphere at various locations across the U.S.. The piece included quotes from organizers and participants and noted that the protests were planned in over 2,000 locations in all 50 states.
Specifically, the New York Times reported on the large crowds that gathered in cities like Philadelphia, Atlanta, New York, and Chicago, emphasizing that the demonstrations were held to challenge what organizers considered Trump's "authoritarian overreach". They also published photos and maps showcasing the nationwide protests. Additionally, The New York Times reported on the protests in Minnesota, where demonstrations continued despite organizers officially canceling them due to a fatal shooting.
Therefore, the premise that the New York Times did not cover the "No Kings" protests is incorrect. The New York Times did cover these events, providing details about their scope, purpose, and impact across the country.

[senseandsensibility]

53. Who is writing this?

It sounds like AI to me.

[defacto7]

54. This is a fact.

Read my post below ...

[defacto7]

52. NYT had live featured coverage yesterday from dozens of cities

with pictures, live feeds and reporters commenting from each city. They started at 9:14 AM ET Saturday morning the 14th and continued through this morning. The last update was 11:42 AM ET. So, they had live coverage for 26 hours. I get the feeling many here don't subscribe so why comment on what you don't know?

WE may not like NYT for one reason or another but fairness and fact has to outperform misinformation or we're no better than our adversaries.

Here's the NYT archived link if you dare ... https://www.nytimes.com/live/2025/06/14/us/protests-news#no-kings-protesters-nationwide-share-why-they-took-to-the-streets

It shows the good and the bad. Lots of good, some bad and some moved me to tears. I want it all. My son and I are in one of the Portland pictures. We protested the ICE offices on Thursday as well. Some minor driveway blocking was met by police. The protests will continue.

Be well. Be fair.

[senseandsensibility]

57. This does not contradict anything in my OP which quotes

very reliable, identified sources on bluesky. My OP is pointing out that there is nothing currently (at the time of my posting) in NYT headlines. They may have covered it yesterday but that's not what my OP was about. And for comparison, the NYT still at the time of my posting was running headlines about the parade.

[spanone]

55. They have been threatened they will lose access ala A.P.

[CrispyQ]

56. CNN has a page devoted to the protests, BUT

not one mention on their home page. A couple of stories on the joke of a parade, but you have to search for protest coverage.

[senseandsensibility]

58. Thank you

That is important and shows the double standard.

[uponit7771]

60. M$M is failing us more and more, go to indie news sources

[Botany]

61. "No Kings" anti-Trump protests attract millions, organizers say

Millions of protesters across the U.S. took to the streets in demonstrations against the Trump administration on Saturday, in stark counter-programming to the president's Washington, D.C., military parade that evening.

Why it matters: "No Kings" protest organizers said the widespread movement marked the biggest single-day anti-President Trump protest during his second administration.



https://www.axios.com/2025/06/14/no-kings-protests-usa-june-14-trump-military-parade

[pat_k]

62. It is bizarre that there is no follow up to the two articles yesterday

Did a search for "no kings" on the nytimes.com site and got these two hits June 14 (shared links). There is also one from June 13. But that is it. Not a word today? No follow up? They really think these two articles captured the scale? captured the number of people showing up in communities large and small, including "red" strongholds?

‘No Kings’ Protests Across the United States

The above article shows a map of "confirmed" protests that doesn't even approach the actual number -- at least 2000. They admit it is not comprehensive, but WTF????!!!! This appears to be an attempt to not just "not cover" but to affirmatively minimize the reality.

After Anti-Trump Protests Sweep the Nation, Curfew Begins in Downtown Los Angeles

Seems to me, a follow up actually compiling an estimate of the numbers who showed up, the number of protests, the number in small communities, etc. would have been a bare minimum for today.

Just for grins, I search for women's march 2017. There were

[BlueHurricane]

63. I saw a lot of coverage today of the protest everywhere

Except the NYtimes. Nothing when I checked their site earlier today from top to bottom on the main web home page. I guess it’s already not important to them. It’s one of the largest protest in US History. Someone should tell them they saw one of Hillary’s emails at the protest. Then they’d cover it for a month.

[underpants]

65. If mentioned at all, The Women's March and June 1 2020 were forgotten within 2 days

by almost all of the media print and cable.

No accident

[SoFlaBro]

67. I stopped reading that motherfucking piece of shit fishwrap when they started with the pro MAGA fuck shit.

[pat_k]

68. Just for grins, I did a quick search on nytimes coverage of the 2017 women's march

No Kings reportedly brought out more people in more places than the 2017 Women's March. For the hell of it, I did a quick search on google for nytimes coverage of that event. This is by no means a comprehensive study of coverage, but when compared to the three hits for no kings (see previous post) the coverage of no kings certainly does appear to be extremely feeble. (There were more articles leading up to Jan 21 and in the months after that are not included.

The New York Times
Opinion | What the Women's March Stands For
Jan 20, 2017

The New York Times
Marchers Pour Into Washington to Pour Out Their Hearts
Jan 21, 2017

The New York Times
Women's March Highlights as Huge Crowds Protest Trump
Jan 21, 2017

The New York Times
Pictures From the 2017 Women's Marches on Every ...
Jan 21, 2017

The New York Times
Defiant Voices Flood U.S. Cities as Women Rally for Rights
Jan 21, 2017

The New York Times
Video: Witness the Women's March in Washington
Jan 22, 2017

The New York Times
Crowd Scientists Say Women's March in Washington Had ...
Jan 22, 2017

The New York Times
After Success of Women's March, a Question Remains
Jan 22, 2017


Who Didn't Go to the Women's March Matters More Than ...
Jan 24, 2017

The New York Times
Opinion | After the Women's March
Jan 24, 2017

[Metaphorical]

69. Print Media Is Now Corporate Media

Four companies own 92% of all newspapers in the US, and roughly the same for television, radio, and magazine (non-newspaper) publications, and all of these have become far more conservative in the last twenty years.

We are in the midst of a corporate coup with media being a big player in it . Consolidation, staff purges, closing of alternative publications. If you're not working for a conservative publication outlet, you're writing an independent blog and getting by with table scraps, because there is no room for any viewpoint that is not sycophantic to the powers that be.

I've been an on-again, off-again journalist for about twenty five-years. The reality is that most of these companies are haemorrhaging money and subscribers, but the message from on-high (the boardrooms) is that those with counterveiling viewpoints will be shown to the door, and forcefully ejected.

[BigmanPigman]

72. Someone posted the same thing at CNN!

This is why MSM is losing readers and viewers but the corporate millionaires seem to be ignorant to the fact, even though they are losing $$$. Isn't that the opposite of what their greedy corporate asses are only interested in?!? I thought their goal was to get as much $$$$$ as possible, no matter how. CNN's ratings have tanked. NYT has lost tons of subscribers yet they continue on the same path. Bill Maher is another clueless ass. I hope they all go bankrupt in a year! And even if they end up printing or airing a few articles or video clips which are objective and balanced as they desperately try to win back some of their audience it is TOO LITTLE AND FAR TOO LATE!!!


Greedy traitors!

[SupportSanity]

74. The New York Times Company Customer service 1 [phone]

Next time we're marching, we can call them WHILE WE ARE MARCHING and ask them "Where is the coverage?"!

Can you imagine customer service getting inundated with calls from the marchers themselves? In real time?!

[travelingthrulife]

75. In a way this works in our favor. People can see the blatant partisanship because

they were at these protests all across America. They now know NYT works for Trump and Republicans.

[NH Ethylene]

76. Massive peace demonstrations under Nixon were also ignored by the media.

At least after the first really big one (as I recollect).

We still prevailed.

[PaxPixie]

77. Gifted NYT article re No Kings 6/14

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/06/14/us/protests-cities-no-kings.html?unlocked_article_code=1.PU8.9OHL.2Rr0alfVPgRR&smid=nytcore-ios-share&referringSource=articleShare

[johnnyplankton]

81. Thank You. I agree the media is horrible but the Times published multiple articles on the protests.

We can't complain about disinformation and then spread it ourselves...

[BComplex]

79. We've been saying for years: media in this country is 96% owned and dictated by the right wing.

That's why we keep hearing "liberal media"....so they can move it more and more to the right every day. Even the so called "liberal" commentators never attack their "fellow journalists", and seem to ignore the ELEPHANT in the room...they actually seem to fall for the "liberal media" crap.

Hell! Their very jobs depend on it.

[Farmer-Rick]

82. They are owned by people

Who don't care about news, journalism or even half decent writing.

They are owned by people who only want to make money. That is the opposite of journalism, news or good writing.

They use to be the gate keepers of information. Thanks to independent media they no longer hold the keys to the gate.

MediasTouch got 22 million viewers just the other day. The NYT claims 10 million subscribers.

[Hotler]

83. Could the NYT survive on a mostly right leaning readership? The NYT is written at a 10th-12th grade level.

They're going to have to chop those numbers in half for MAGA.

For disclosure, I myself have had to reach for my dictionary at times when reading the NYT.

[TBF]

87. For some reason people think they are going to influence what the msm does -

Last edited Mon Jun 16, 2025, 05:22 PM - Edit history (1)

The MSM is owned by billionaires, who have all been very clear with their support for Trump. It's a waste of time, imo, to keep harping on it. Instead, find independent media and follow them. Groups like Meidas are after views - just join their podcast or you tube station and support them that way. They are blowing the right-wing outlets out of the water and winning awards. I think that's our best shot at having media who speaks for us. The NYTimes won't do it - their interests lie elsewhere.