The NYT asks some questions of itself, as paper’s critics pile on
Morning Brief: Scribd and Samsung make some acquisitions, look for more and bolder acquisitions to be announced after the new administration loosens regulations
The New York Times did not treat the 2016 election as it might have any other, it instead was more willing to call out things said by Donald Trump as outright lies. (It also was as obsessed with Hillary Clinton’s email troubles as every other newspaper in the nation.) In the end, calling out false statements did little to influence the portion of the public inclined to vote Republican.
What the paper seems unwilling to acknowledge, or at least investigate, is that a large percentage of the reading public no longer to the NYT for news – it likely does not depend on newspapers at all, and instead gets its news from Facebook, and the hundreds of media properties that feed into the social network, sometimes with fake news, but certainly with content that reinforces the views of Trump supporters. This fact will be the paper’s biggest obstacle to achieving its goal of be completely reader supported – without a strong advertising base, there simply won’t be as many paid subscribers available to overcome its print ad losses. (I admit that the paper is bragging about the surge in paid digital subscription it sold near the end of the election, but I remain skeptical.)
Meanwhile, the Trump team is obviously unhappy with the coverage they received from the Times, or The Washington Post, and so former Senator Newt Gingrich has written a column for Fox News. The column really isn’t meant to be read by a NYT reader or the paper’s editors, but does what news that appears on Fox News is designed for, to reinforce the views of the Fox News viewer. Many of the same questions could be asked of the cable TV channel, including when will it begin to hire reporters at all rather than news readers.
The New York Times, Arthur Sulzberger Jr. and Dean Baquet:
To Our Readers, From the Publisher and Executive Editor
After such an erratic and unpredictable election there are inevitable questions: Did Donald Trump’s sheer unconventionality lead us and other news outlets to underestimate his support among American voters? What forces and strains in America drove this divisive election and outcome? Most important, how will a president who remains a largely enigmatic figure actually govern when he takes office?
Seven questions for the New York Times
- Does the Times have any reporters, editors, or columnists who will say they voted for Trump, and has it hired any new ones?
- Has it hired any reporters who are even Republicans?
- Has it changed its policies that allowed journalists to express their opinions about the events and people they covered in their news stories?
- Will it ask the Pulitzer Prize board to withdraw, and its reporters to return, any prizes that might be awarded for news stories that contained reporters’ personal opinions?
- Have its editors retracted misleading news headlines that expressed opinions or pure speculation–such as the paper’s coverage of Trump’s tax returns?
- Has it fired reporters who admitted to writing politically motivated “news” stories and encouraged interview subjects to talk to them so they could stop Trump?
- Has it retracted its shameful election-eve front-page story “reporting” on Trump’s innermost thoughts and feelings, virtually every sentence of which is filled with reporters’ opinions and speculations–featuring claims like “he is struggling to suppress his bottomless need for attention”?
Trump attacks ‘fools’ at The New York Times
In a series of tweets Wednesday, Trump attacked a Times story about firings and infighting that have left his transition team in a “state of disarray” — reporting backed up by CNN and other major news organizations.
“The failing @nytimes story is so totally wrong on transition,” Trump tweeted. “It is going so smoothly. Also, I have spoken to many foreign leaders.”
…During his Twitter tear, the president-elect said he had taken calls from “many foreign leaders.” He also claimed the Times “is just upset that they looked like fools in their coverage of me.”
A couple tech companies made some acquisitions this week. One might guess, however, that if regulations are about to be loosened, we might see several that might have been unthinkable in an Obama, or for that matter a Hillary Clinton, administration.
Scribd Acquires Oximity to Streamline Content Publishing and Distribution
We’re excited to announce that we’ve acquired Oximity, an emerging content publishing platform that developed technology to help content creators and organizations easily publish and distribute high-quality content. Its proprietary social media distribution algorithms help content creators find new audiences. This asset acquisition will enable Scribd to expand the tools it can offer publishers, allowing us to bring even more quality content to readers.
In just over two years, Oximity built a collection of almost one million articles, contributed by 1,000 global organizations such as Global Voices and WITNESS, and drove almost 10 million visits at its peak to this content. In addition, Oximity attracted 1.2 million registered users to its platform. Scribd will leverage Oximity’s technology to automate the content uploading and categorization process for new and existing content partners while also extending the reach of that content via social channels.
Samsung buys NewNet for RCS technology
The South Korean tech giant said the acquisition showed its commitment to Rich Communications Services (RCS) as mobile networks transition to IP-based networks and services.
NewNet Canada, formed in 2009 and previously known as NewPace before being bought by NewNet Communication Technologies in 2014, provides RCS infrastructure and services.
Going forward, Samsung plans to offer solutions to telcos without RCS infrastructure, and launch more handsets with the technology. The company said the broader communications ecosystem will benefit the mobile market.
It is said that the United States is not a soccer playing nation, and its men’s national team did everything it could last night to prove it in an embarrassing display of… whatever it was doing out there.
But it is not, in fact, true that the US is not a soccer playing nation. The latest statistics from 2015 show that over 24 million people play the game at some level in the US, making the US the second largest soccer playing nation in the world, only behind China. Of course, the issue is organized soccer, and even there the numbers are pretty impressive. There are over 3 million youth soccer players. Attendance at MLS games is over 19K, placing it eighth in the world. At the college level, 1,673 schools have soccer programs, and only just over 12 percent are foreign students. Yet US Soccer continues to field a team that plays as if they were new to the game.
While discusses continue concerning whether it is time to change coaches, or whether player selection has been bad, it remain unarguable that leadership at US Soccer has been less than world-class.
The USMNT Got The Ass Whooping They Deserved
he United States Men’s National Team is in a bad place right now. A few days after losing the opening game of the final round of World Cup qualifying 2-1 to Mexico, they traveled down to Costa Rica and got played off the pitch by Los Ticos from the first whistle. Costa Rica are a perfectly fine team with a roster of decent players, but the USMNT is more than capable of putting up with a team like that. Instead, our boys turned in one of the worst performances of the Jurgen Klinsmann era (the USMNT has never trailed by four goals in a World Cup qualifier since 1980) and got smoked…
…It’s become abundantly clear that for all of Klinsmann’s gifts as a recruiter, motivator, and long-term visionary, he is not a good soccer coach. He is erratic in both team selection and tactical setup, he has no idea how to balance the attacking and defending duties of a midfield, and he retreats into hyper-conservative setups when playing any opponent of substance. The USMNT player pool is not exactly good, but the players aren’t terrible—which is how they played tonight and too often during Klinsmann’s tenure.
If Klinsmann bites it, as some analysts suggest he should, Bruce Arena is reportedly the leading candidate to replace him.