Every so often an old Wall Street Journal article from 90s on anime makes rounds online again and gets dunked on, yet again. Oldtakus @twwk & @KhakiBlueSocks re-read the article and wrote a joint retrospective piece on it and 90s anime entitled, "Mechanized Monsters, Poké-Pulp Fiction, and Advancing Attitudes About Anime."
The #WallStreetJournal frames the question of whether to keep supplying an #Israeli war that has killed tens of thousands of #Palestinians as “another test of how much Mr. #Biden is willing to bend to the left.”
#Cuba says it broke up a ring recruiting #Cubans as mercenaries to fight for #Russian troops in #Ukraine. Unusual step to go so public against #Moscow.
The WSJ is vying for the Worst Op-ed Prize against the WAPo this week.
These kinds of nonsensical gibberish promoted by media is why it’s harder to have meaningful efficacious climate action.
And it’s climate, not weather, you ignoramus author. At least get the terminology right.🤦🏽♀️
The New York Times is responsible for Trump being in office instead of Hillary and that’s not even particularly controversial.
Blame Maggie Haberman if you like, blame Patrick Healy, or blame Dean Baquet. They all share blame. But the New York Times made coverage choices that got Trump into the presidency.
Right, the experts (in NYT, MSNBC, etc) knew there was NOTHING THERE, the State Dept allowed staff to have a personal email account. And use the State Dept account that was archived by State Dept.
AFTER she left the State Dept, they changed the rules.
But they're not merely finally catching on to the seemingly obvious. They're writing about academics who have published a systematic study of profit-driven #inflation.
The WSJ is owned by News Corp, focused mainly on the corporate world, targeted at corporate folk who are presumably right-leaning on average, and prints all manner of far-right nonsense on its editorial page.
However, its news pages are generally apolitical -- just business facts and figures. And when a political take is perceptible, it's usually somewhat liberal-ish.
The editorial page is probably denouncing the economists who published the article's assertions, if not ignoring them.
This is really an example that demonstrates that the wall between news and editorials, established when News Corp bought Dow Jones in 2007, remains solid.