Were Changes to Sanders Article ‘Stealth Editing’? The NYT's Editors Answer.

[Lodestar]

Updated, 10:54 a.m., to add new observations based on reader response.

Bernie Sanders supporters have been unhappy with The Times in recent months, but it looked as if they were beginning to have their moment in the sun on Monday morning.

An article by Jennifer Steinhauer, published online, carried the headline “Bernie Sanders Scored Victories for Years via Legislative Side Doors.” It described the way the Vermont senator had managed a significant number of legislative victories in Congress despite the political independence that might have hindered him.

The article stayed in essentially that form for several hours online – with some very minor tweaks — but in the late afternoon, Times editors made significant changes to its tone and content, turning it from almost glowing to somewhat disparaging. The later headline read: “Via Legislative Side Doors, Bernie Sanders Won Modest Victories.”

And these two paragraphs were added:

But in his presidential campaign Mr. Sanders is trying to scale up those kinds of proposals as a national agenda, and there is little to draw from his small-ball legislative approach to suggest that he could succeed.

Mr. Sanders is suddenly promising not just a few stars here and there, but the moon and a good part of the sun, from free college tuition paid for with giant tax hikes to a huge increase in government health care, which has made even liberal Democrats skeptical.

cont'd

http://publiceditor.blogs.nytimes.com/2016/03/17/new-york-times-bernie-sanders-coverage-public-editor/?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=second-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0

[Lodestar]

1. Their replies are soooo slippery.

Notice they don't quite make a full commitment (yes or no) to this question:

Three editors told me in no uncertain terms that the editing changes had not been made in response to complaints from the Clinton camp. Did the Clinton people even reach out?

“Not that I know of,” Mr. Baquet told me in an email. The article’s immediate editor, Michael Tackett, agreed: “There’s zero evidence of that.”

Seems to me their lack of a real answer IS 'evidence' of complicity. Who do they think they're
fooling?

[nxylas]

3. There's another possible explanation

That the plan all along was to publish a pro-Bernie article, hoping that it would get shared among Bernie supporters, and then add the paragraphs in order to deliver an anti-Bernie message to them once the link had been passed around.

[Doctor_J]

2. They're lying about their lying

The Clinton apparatus is as repulsive as the republicans

[MisterP]

4. I read that as "recursive" and that fits too

you gotta use differentials for politics now

[earthshine]

5. Some additional information ...

The New York Times pulled a huge bait and switch on Bernie and his supporters. After writing a seemingly positive article on Bernie's accomplishments, and giving sufficient time for people to link to it, the article was rewritten to make light of it.

I fell for this trap. I passed this link around to my friends and family. And now when people click on it, they’re reading an article that is slanted against him. I canceled my subscription to the New York Times over this.

Matt Taibbi of Rolling Stone details the changes.
http://www.rollingstone.com/politics/news/how-the-new-york-times-sandbagged-bernie-sanders-20160315

Robert Reich discusses it here.
https://www.facebook.com/RBReich/posts/1173487719330489:0

A rundown of the many connections between the Times and the Clintons.
http://freebeacon.com/politics/new-york-times-top-shareholder-is-a-clinton-foundation-donor/

More Links Discovered Between Hillary Clinton and The New York Times.
http://www.ijreview.com/2015/06/341980-connect-dots-connections-hillary-clinton-new-york-times-discovered/

Additional discussion on DU can be found at these two links.

http://www.democraticunderground.com/12511497840

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1016147397

[ejbr]

6. With these tactics,

how is one to accept a Bernie loss of the nomination, should it happen, and then vote and promote Hillary? Instead of bringing us together, they would rather divide us. Maybe this is 3-dimensional Republican chess.

[clg311]

7. Orwellian

I was about to sign up for the NYT until this.