What's Great About The New York Times Is How Pompously Bad At Everything They Are
This morning, we talked about that call Donald Trump had with the governors, where Montana's Steve Bullock told Trump in no uncertain terms that they didn't have the damn coronavirus tests they need to avert catastrophe there. In response, Trump said he just hasn't heard anything about testing problems lately, and if he hasn't heard about it, it must not exist.
The New York Times reported on that too.
Oh for God's sake.
The byline is Jonathan Martin, Maggie Haberman and Peter Baker, AKA Who Else, Who Else, and The Other One.
You have the headline, which is basically He Said, They Said, Both Sides Say A Thing, Who Could Possibly Know!
Meanwhile, governors, Republican and Democratic alike, are all over the damn place saying WHERE ARE THE FUCKING TESTS? But not only is Trump's malformed opinion presented as valid, it goes first in the headline. And then it gets repeated in the sub-hed! And of course, the governors' factual knowledge of the issue is presented as just another opinion.
Y'all, the piece is worse, but it really doesn't warrant quoting much, because it's just more of the He Said, They Said, washed, rinsed, repeated, ad infinitum.
Let's just move on to Yale epidemiologist/infectious disease researcher Gregg Gonsalves kicking the Times's ass, which sorely offended one of the Times writers so!
"Move along," said the pompously wrong New York Times reporter to the infectious disease specialist from Yale.
Really! That is what just happened there!
You wanna see the ratio, just because it's so pretty?
You hate to see it.
Gonsalves began to kick Martin's ass:
And he continued for about 16 more tweets, pointing out why "Who won the morning?!" reporting like this is bullshit in everyday times, and especially unhelpful during a global pandemic.
Here is the thing. We don't think these reporters are actually stupid, or that they think there's some kind of dispute over whether there is a real testing problem, or whether we need to do more testing. Testing everyone for the novel coronavirus, and also developing antibody tests to see if people have been previously exposed, are the only ways we can start thinking in terms of opening society back up -- as Trump wants to do so badly, we hear!
Martin, Haberman And The Other One are just doing the same bullshit they always do -- which is kinda the same thing the Times has always done in the Trump administration -- and just acting as stenographers for what people said, even if what some of the people said (Trump and anybody in the White House) is absolute bullshit. In so doing, they might be doing what they were taught to do in Journalism-ing For Dummies 101, but they're certainly not adapting and working to make journalism better in a time where the baseline is crisis (the Trump era) compounded by a true global pandemic crisis.
And we guess it needs to be said for some reason, but you actually aren't supposed to cover global pandemics like you cover White House political bullshit. Maybe the Times should let the science and public health reporters lead the way on this one!
Oh yeah, and with his little "move along" to the actual epidemiologist, Martin was just doing that other thing Times writers are so well known for, which is reacting to valid criticism like little Baby Trumps.
We'd say "do better," but they won't, so fuck it.
Follow Evan Hurst on Twitter RIGHT HERE, DO IT RIGHT HERE!
Wonkette is fully funded by readers like YOU. If you love Wonkette, SUPPORT WONKETTE FINANCIALLY.