A quick morning read & action to share W/friends at a time of your choosing!
.
.
.
Focused Hillary read in 5-8 minutes
“CHALLENGING SEXIST
LANGUAGE: AN OPEN LETTER TO THE NEW YORK TIMES
SEPTEMBER 6, 2016 BY WISE
WOMEN FOR CLINTON
We are an organization
of thousands of women who enthusiastically support Secretary
Hillary Clinton for president. Our members know very well her
qualifications, experience, hard work, policies, concern for issues
important to all Americans, trustworthiness, kindness, and
graciousness.
That is why we were
appalled to read a story published in the digital edition of The New
York Times on Monday, originally titled Presidential Candidates
Gear Up for a Busy Labor Day, in which reporter Ashley Parker
referred to Secretary Clinton as a
“politician’s-wife-turned-politician-herself” who spent the
summer “hobnobbing…with celebrities.” In two demeaning, sexist
sentences, The Times dismissed Secretary Clinton’s extraordinary
accomplishments, including her Yale law degree, the decades she spent
working for the poor and underprivileged, her eight years as a
senator from New York, and her four years as secretary of state (in
addition to her eight years as first lady).
By attempting to
delegitimize the secretary or depict her as a frivolous
party-hopper, The Times has done the candidate a grave
disservice. Secretary Clinton is a hardworking candidate who has been
campaigning, honing policy, and doing voter outreach for more than a
year. That she spent some of August undertaking traditional
fundraising, as have her predecessors, is not surprising given the
requirements of running a campaign. We would venture to guess,
however, that if the Clinton campaign were cash poor, The Times would
be the first to point a finger of doom.
And while the wording of
the article, and the bias it revealed, angered us, the
surreptitious editing that followed—perhaps in response to tweets
and emails—without any mea culpa from the editors, only exacerbated
the problem. As this NewsDiffs log of the various
incarnations of the story shows, the original version, posted before
9:00 am, remained on nytimes.com virtually untouched for eight and a
half hours. Most readers internalized that story, flaws and all. It
wasn’t until after 5:00 pm that the online post was significantly
revised—without a time stamp or editor’s note of explanation—now
calling Secretary Clinton a “veteran politician” but leaving the
“hobnobbing” comment intact. The current live draft, released
after midnight, became the above-the-fold lead story in
Tuesday’s print edition. The “hobnobbing” characterization
was gone, but the writer could not resist a snarky assertion that
Secretary Clinton “made nice with the news media” on her airplane
yesterday, as if she somehow owed them something.
Such stealth editing on
the part of The Times has been called out before, addressed in a
column last March, in which then public editor Margaret Sullivan
noted that “[d]igital platforms, after all, are not a test run.”
Yet that is exactly how the editors chose to treat this story,
publicly disseminating it to millions of readers in draft form for
the better part of a day, and leaving in place editorializing that is
supposed to be verboten according to The Times’s own style guide.
Slipping in disrespectfully sexist passages and then deleting them
without notice or explanation is unworthy of the paper’s editorial
practices.
This is not an isolated
incident; we have become increasingly frustrated with The Times for
its skewed coverage of Secretary Clinton. Too often during this
election season, The Times has published slanted articles
masquerading as news.
… UPDATE: Since we
first posted this letter, The Times has published a story about
Donald Trump’s various suspect campaign contributions, including
those to Pam Bondi, under the toothless headline Donald
Trump’s Donation Is His Latest Brush With Campaign Finance Rules.
Rather than call out the corruption themselves, or point out that
other media outlets have been questioning these donations for
months, the reporters attribute all criticism of Trump’s practices
to “Democrats and liberal watchdogs.” To their credit, however,
The Times editorial board simultaneously published a piece,
titled Pay for Play, Mr. Trump?, in which they
pointedly question the legality of payments to both
Bondi and Abbott. “
You can read the open
letter to the editor in full here
.
.
.
Focused Hillary thought! 30 seconds
.
.
.
Focused Hillary action to share in 30 seconds
You can share the meme with the link to the open letter to the New York Times on Twitter here
You can read the letter in the Hillary Focused Read section above ^^^
.
.
.
*
Please check in with Hillary on a regular basis, communicate with her and share her message by clicking on the following links...
*
Also, you can find great Hillary information here...
*
And, you can find informed Hillary stories and campaign updates here...
.
.
.
Thank you for Networking for Hillary today!
#ACT #ImWithHer #StrongerTogether #WomenTogether
.
.
.
It's the final countdown & I'd like to add to the opportunity to read and to share Hillary at a glance the opportunity to donate to OUR WIN ON NOVEMBER 8! From $1 on up. Whatever you are comfortable with. Every little bit helps...TY!
It's easy. Just hit the link here
*
*
Curated by Gail Mountain, Network for Hillary Daily is not affiliated with the official campaign of Hillary Clinton in any capacity. This is an independent pilot blog committed to electing Hillary Clinton as the next President of the United States. The hope is that you will, at a glance, learn more about the candidate and that you will, with a click or two, also take action on her behalf daily!
( You can also find me on Twitter at https://twitter.com/GKMTNtwits and at GKMTNblogs http://gkmtnblogs.blogspot.com/ )
*
***
No comments:
Post a Comment