122 Comments
User's avatar
Ginny K's avatar

Boston Globe headline: In Memorial Day Remarks, Trump Honors Soldiers by Erica L. Green. REALLY????! This is why I canceled my WaPo and NYT subscriptions after decades being a daily reader. This is why I read Substack first every morning: I don't want to be lied to. I've hung onto my Globe subscription but this headline has me teetering on the edge.

Expand full comment
Mary Mac's avatar

Maybe call them out - to them. Let them know exactly what you’ve said here, because you’ve stated it so well. As for me? I’m cancelling Paramount+. And I’m letting them (and the major shareholder Shari Redstone) know. Perhaps some cancelled subscriptions will have an impact on the merger talks, just like Trump’s threats do. Spread the word.

Expand full comment
GJ Loft ME CA FL IL NE CT MI's avatar

I heard on MSNBC today that the large law firm that capitulated to Donald Trump has lost several senior lawyers and partners because they refused to stand up to Trump.

And now Trump is demanding they represent him in some of his ridiculous suits.

Expand full comment
Susanna J. Sturgis's avatar

This MA resident is also hanging on to her Globe subscription, having ditched the NYT after 2016 and let my WaPo sub run out earlier this year. I wouldn't dump a news source strictly on the basis of headlines, though headlines do matter. With the NYT it was the 2016 election coverage capped off by the hiring of Bret Stephens. With WaPo it was the relentless anti-Biden coverage in the spring of 2024 compounded by Bezos's refusal to endorse Harris-Walz. The Globe's relentless coverage of the Karen Read case (in which I have zero interest) is annoying but so far I'm managing to look past it.

Expand full comment
Margaret Sullivan's avatar

Wise analysis!

Expand full comment
Susanna J. Sturgis's avatar

I'm glad you're a Guardian contributor because I've been a happy Guardian subscriber for a while now!

Expand full comment
Tom Himmel's avatar

Yes, just have to note pretty parallel for this MA resident: I also let my WaPo run out by not renewing(can’t really ‘cancel’ them once paid). I’ve been a Globe subscriber for years, and continue in large part to support print news (and their sports coverage) - I’ve made it a practice to skip over the Karen Read news! I have held on to NYT digital, and really appreciated Margaret’s frequent perspective on their coverage.

Expand full comment
GJ Loft ME CA FL IL NE CT MI's avatar

The WAPO has given new life to Norm Eisen and Jennifer Rubin with "The Contrarian" on substack. And so many other excellent journalists have left the WAPO including Eugene Robinson, Greg Sargent and Ashley Parker.

Ms. Sullivan, if you read this how was Warren Buffett to work for at the Buffalo News?

Expand full comment
Gary Sheffer's avatar

I have been critical in these comments about the NY Times (e.g. it wasn't until late in the story that it mentioned Trump's looney and offensive comments at West Point). But I also recognize that it's facing a daily barrage of in-plain-sight corruption and lies. What seems to be lacking from the Times and others is perspective; taking a step back to frame the civic crisis we face. Instead of chasing the latest distraction (e.g. military parades) and describing Trump's gold decor, focus on his addled thinking, the collapse of American values, and his inability to get things done (e.g. Ukraine, healthcare, infrastructure, tariffs will pay for everything). Substack writers such as Heather Cox Richardson do this daily. I am surprised the Times cannot.

Expand full comment
Susanna J. Sturgis's avatar

Keep in mind that in general headlines *aren't* written by the reporter(s) who wrote the story, and that editing happens before the story makes it into print, online or on paper. At the same time, I think it's generally acknowledged that many of us don't read beyond the first few paragraphs of a story unless we're very interested in the subject, so burying important facts and perspectives 8 or 9 paras down is pretty damn irresponsible in my book.

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

I agree. The bottom line is readership. Headlines deny the outrages, smooth what we *should* be outraged about because of fear. They dial back to keep neutrality. This is probably what the headlinewriter has been hired to do. I agree about the term "sanewashing". It is not only reprehensible but it does us such a disservice. It's about the bottom line which is not what journalism, a very important part of our democracy, should be about.Still we need our major newspapers and visual media. If people cancel or if they don't they should still let this be known.

Friends have tuned out from exhaustion from the outrages and horrors. They now get news just from the NYTimes- including the headlines- and the New Yorker. These are intelligent caring people just unable to deal with the barrage nor give the time needed to devote to it. It's just what Trump & those in this regime want. The headlinewriters are in cahoots effectively. This is a fight. Some just cannot or will not and so skim or tune out.

Expand full comment
Susanna J. Sturgis's avatar

I depend primarily on assorted Substackers, the Atlantic, and the Guardian. Also local media -- where I live, we're unbelievably lucky to have TWO weekly newspapers. Some Facebook friends share media from their area, and I value that too. But filters are most definitely crucial. Each of us needs to limit her/his intake according to preference and necessity. (What do you *need* to know and what's just going to piss you off? <g>)

Expand full comment
Potter's avatar

I need to know enough to get the general picture which broadens or expands such that the details themselves about repercussions and how we have been diminished and endangered are very depressing and worrisome. We need a tipping point where things change dramatically in the opposite direction. I don’t see it happening because we need massive action. People are either going to get engaged and energized or turn away exhausted. For those if us that don’t want to leave or cannot this is a battle that must be fought here and now. So I feel caught.

Expand full comment
Lex Alexander's avatar

Absolutely correct. One of the Times's big selling points, always implicitly and sometimes explicitly, is that it provides context and perspective. Yet, for the most part, they have been lacking in the paper's political coverage for coming up on three decades.

Expand full comment
Lise Brenner's avatar

Agree - and I don’t think it is ‘cannot’ but choosing not to — I have been reading the NYT since 1981 when I moved there and coverage overall has shifted greatly and I would say, as a NY’er at heart no matter where I currently live, that it now privileges a kind of global wealth rather than city coverage. Which makes sense in this age of whatever it is but also weakens the deep local truth telling I used to love them for. And I think this perspective makes them cowardly about truth to power overall. They have been consistently infuriating over the last 10 years about national politics.

Expand full comment
M Figueroa's avatar

Exactly! The seismic shift in reading the NEWS in the era of Trump&Co has been a turning away from the so called “legacy media” and turning to Substack. I credit “Letters from an American” written by Prof. Heather Cox-Richardson as the guiding light to other outstanding Substack contributors and my sanity.

Expand full comment
GrrlScientist's avatar

Margaret Sullivan: i've posted here before about how grateful i am that you removed your paywall, but here i am again: removal of your paywall eases my financial burden as i seek to remain informed and as i seek to support women (in particular) in journalism who are honest, informed and courageous. thank you.

Expand full comment
Margaret Sullivan's avatar

I am glad to have you here!

Expand full comment
Al Bellenchia's avatar

Silence is complicity in the face of this administration’s relentless assault on so many core principles of a lawful, just and fair society — which admittedly we have not always been for far too many. Words and voices are not enough though.

“In keeping silent about evil, in burying it so deep within us that no sign of it appears on the surface, we are implanting it, and it will rise up a thousand fold in the future. When we neither punish nor reproach evildoers, we are not simply protecting their trivial old age, we are thereby ripping the foundations of justice from beneath new generations.” - Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn

Expand full comment
Yvonne Caruthers's avatar

That’s a great quote that I’d not seen before. Thanks for posting it.

Expand full comment
Alex Curley's avatar

Unfortunately for NPR, the threats to its federal funding don't end at this First Amendment lawsuit - there's always the replacement of Corporation for Public Broadcasting board members, the dissolution of CPB from the next budget cycle, FCC investigations, and on and on - which makes their stand even more principled and courageous.

Expand full comment
Bacall's avatar

Thank you for mentioning the Student Press Law Center as a possible area to support. They provide invaluable legal advice to student journalists, the first persons reporting truths many school boards and superintendents seek to hide. I taught high school journalism for 28 years. In 2000-2001, my students successfully fought censorship of its entire publication in front of a capacity crowd with advice from the SPLC. Local press (TV, radio and print) covered the meeting where students bravely faced the antagonistic board chairman, read the stories and editorialized in favor of their journalistic efforts, which were overwhelmingly parent supported. The editors were honored with the National Courage in Journalism Award in 2001 and flown to Boston from a little southern town for ceremonies. Without the SPLC, they would have been silenced through fear tactics used by the superintendant.

Expand full comment
Margaret Sullivan's avatar

As a former high school journalist myself, I agree!

Expand full comment
Patrick's avatar

Was lucky enough to be in a high school that actually had a *class* in Journalism. The main focus of the class was to publish the school paper but we also studied journalism as an academic subject. The teacher was also the school newspaper adviser but also a fine teacher, and she instilled in us a great appreciation of the tradition of journalism.

Expand full comment
Holly E Bartlett's avatar

My news sources now are almost all SubStack! I do read The Atlantic but I cancelled Washington Post months ago and I find I read the NYTimes less and less. I forward SubStack posts to friends (choosing to match content to friend’s interests). I’ve yet to get a negative comment back. Please keep writing.

Expand full comment
Brendan Martin's avatar

I admired Pelley’s speech, but I also noted he didn’t mention Trump by name. He should have.

I think “courage” is the most overused word in politics when it comes to elected officeholders and people in positions of prestige. It is a privilege to speak on principle from a prominent forum.

Real courage comes from ordinary people who protest at risk of their livelihoods or even their lives—those student commencement speakers demonstrated it.

As a corollary, I don’t think what you’re seeing from some media outlets is “cowardice”—it’s conformism, cupidity, or outright collaboration from conviction.

Expand full comment
Margaret Sullivan's avatar

Good points

Expand full comment
Lex Alexander's avatar

I suspect that Pelley didn't mention Trump by name because he didn't want to give the administration a pretext for going after Wake Forest's tax-exempt status. Besides, everyone there or watching online knew exactly whom he was talking about.

Expand full comment
Brendan Martin's avatar

That’s a good point, but it also reinforces my suspicion that it was a capitulation. If only some people and institutions protest, it’s easier for the regime to target them.

Expand full comment
Lex Alexander's avatar

I don't see it as a capitulation by Pelley, but, rather, a decision to be a good guest and let Wake Forest decide for itself what fights it wants to pick. I'd say they picked an excellent one just by inviting Pelley to speak, as they probably had a pretty good general idea of what he was going to say.

Expand full comment
Mary's avatar

Amen!

Expand full comment
25johnrobinson@gmail.com's avatar

Great advice, particularly “Demand better of the news media you follow.” News organizations need readers and viewers. By and large, they pay attention to complaints. I know I did when I was an editor. So let them know.

Expand full comment
Margaret Sullivan's avatar

I did, too, John!

Expand full comment
Vickie Morris's avatar

Thank you for that. However, I repeatedly commented (in the Comments section) and wrote letters to the editor at Washington Post about misleading headlines and sane-washing to no avail. Others did as well. At least they commented on the same issues in the Comments section and they too disappeared one after another. Some that I really cherished over years. I have just cancelled NYT for the second time. I cancelled right after the 10 days of above-the-fold Comey coverage just before the 2016 election, then got lured back in 2023. Disgusted now by the same mis-leading header problem and wall-to-wall coverage of Trump as if his every decision on one of a sane POTUS.

Expand full comment
GJ Loft ME CA FL IL NE CT MI's avatar

I along with several others are banned for life from commenting on WAPO stories. I called out an obvious troll who was a Trump supporter and quite obnoxious.

I kept reading the WAPO for quite awhile because of Catherine Rampell, Jennifer Rubin and a few others. But, eventually I'd had enough of Bezos interference.

Expand full comment
25johnrobinson@gmail.com's avatar

Yes, Vickie, I know you’re right and I feel your frustration. I should have qualified my comment to smaller outlets. Mine was a community paper of 100,000 readers. The type of paper in which the editors would see their readers in the grocery store. The sense was, we’d better pay attention to them; we couldn’t afford to lose any!

Expand full comment
Vickie Morris's avatar

Ahh that explains it! I love my local paper and support them even tho it comes free at our rural mail box.

Expand full comment
Doughboy's avatar

Just read the 43 page motion for relief—was well put together and perfectly highlights the egregious affront on the first amendment. If only there were a way to get the ‘alpha bro’ podcasters, that are self proclaimed patriots. Some, like Shawn Ryan, use their patriotism ethos (he was a frmr Navy Seal apparently) as a selling point. Any democracy loving patriot that goes on these podcasts has a duty to take the truth (e.g., above mentioned motion) to them, and force them to reconcile these conflicting ideologies. This should be possible, presumably, if they are not Russian assets.

Expand full comment
Marla Crockett's avatar

Thank you, Margaret! I'm so glad you mentioned the NYT story on Trump's West Point speech. It was sane-washed beyond belief! I couldn't find the comment button (maybe they'd closed it?), but I do plan to register my complaint at: national@nytimes.com. You can reach their Washington bureau at washington@nytimes.com.

I'm relying on my Substack columnists to keep me sane, but the Guardian is great, as is Ground News, which analyzes bias in coverage, including blind spots for the left and the right...If our news media would quit reducing everything to left-right politics and start framing stories with government and the public interest in mind, we would be a lot better off! It's a battle I'll keep fighting in my notes and calls.

Expand full comment
Amy Pemberton's avatar

I was not impressed by Ground News. I found that getting balanced reporting on nonsense and trivia was not making me more informed. And alot of the so-called blind spots on the left were cases of "we're not engaging with this because it's nonsense or not really news".

In the words of the Unitarian Jihad, you get balance by consulting experts who have studied the issues, not by setting opposing ideologues head-to-head. But cage-matching ideologues is exciting; reasoned discussion isn't. Hence our current mess.

Expand full comment
Christopher's avatar

I would love a piece that simply quotes all the NYT’s sane washing headlines regarding trump over the past 2 years. The one you cite here “Trump Gives Commencement Address at West Point, Stressing a New Era,” is now standard NYT “lipstick on a pig.” It appears that the NYT must run every headline on trump through Karoline Leavitt who embodies “lipstick on a pig” or “ a cross on satan.” Please at some point pen a piece on the process of headline writing that results in NYT blatant distorted headlines on trump.

Expand full comment
GJ Loft ME CA FL IL NE CT MI's avatar

It would be a book. Oftentimes, the stories aren't any better than the headlines.

Expand full comment
Breeze's avatar

And if you accept the above challenge, Ms. Sullivan, see if you can pen such a piece without the usual “the Times remains indispensable” sops, especially as every comparison you offer where NYT falls short of other outlets would seem to give lie to this.

Expand full comment
Mc Nelly Torres's avatar

"I'll tell you what freedom means to me: No fear." -- Nina Simone

Expand full comment
Carolyn Ogren's avatar

It irks me to no end when I am listening to news on TV or radio and I hear these dumbed down, whitewashed reporting about the current administration. It is just as bad at times in our local paper but usually that comes from a national source. Somehow we democrats just don’t get covered at all it seems. It’s very frustrating.

Expand full comment
GJ Loft ME CA FL IL NE CT MI's avatar

Like the interview with Mike Johnson where he kept giving the same answer about why he is taking away Medicaid from over 200,000 of his own constituents.

Expand full comment
Mary's avatar

There is plenty to criticize in the media, but one voice who I think is really standing up to the current administration is Will Bunch at the Philadelphia Inquirer. I don't live in Philly anymore, but have kept my subscription because of Mr. Bunch. His most recent: https://share.inquirer.com/eidupJ

Expand full comment
Margaret Sullivan's avatar

I’m a Will Bunch fan.

Expand full comment
Ruth's avatar

Hate to keep jumping on NYTimes headlines, but today's "SpaceX Loses Control of Starship, Adding to Spacecraft's Mixed Record" struck me as a bit off-balance. Mixed record? Really?

On the positive side, I want to mention the Ambrook newsletter, a very niche, beautifully produced weekly collection of original stories and links about American farming. They've been doing a wonderful job of contextualizing the destruction coming out of various federal agencies and what it means for farmers and others in the food system. Even more niche is Local Food Forum, a newsletter that's a one-man effort by a retired journalist in Chicago, Bob Benenson. He started a few years ago documenting farmers markets in the Chicago area, and in addition to that he now documents food events of all sorts in the upper midwest, i.e. opening of co-op markets, conferences on the local food systems in response to the loss of USDA funding, Community Supported Agriculture. It's a labor of love, and I really wish we had something like that in my city.

As always, thanks for all you do. This is the only substack that I read twice, once as soon as I see it in my inbox, and then later, when I've had a chance to think about it!

Expand full comment
Margaret Sullivan's avatar

Double read is a great compliment in our over-saturated moment; thanks!

Expand full comment
GJ Loft ME CA FL IL NE CT MI's avatar

I agree that it's oversaturated at the moment, but there is such an incredible group of people writing today. And, as far as I know, this is done without any editorial control from SUBSTACK.

Expand full comment