I wrote to the editor of the NYT yesterday about the lack of coverage- and perhaps others can do the same.
The news should have included the pathetic and divisive video Trump released, of a crowned Trump in a jet dumping human excrement on the marching crowds. Presidential? Peace-prize worthy?!
Let's start planning for the next one, folks. The people, united, will never be defeated.
Aside from ignoring or downplaying No Kings, the so-called liberal media has completely ignored the figurative and now literal sh-tposting coming from Trump, the White House, and all the associated apparatchiks (Leavitt and Leung answering a reporter's question with "your mom," the quote from Ms. Jackson in the article, etc.). The height of integrity and professionalism (not). These troglodytes aspire to sit at the middle school bullies' table. But 30-40% of the country loves it, apparently.
Exactly right. I meant to include that in my comment. Complete asymmetrical coverage. To call it a double standard would be aspirational. More like quintuple…
Next time someone asks for the definition of shit-posting, you can show them that video.haha! But in all seriousness, it’s a total disgrace that the so-called prez has nothing better to do with his time than engage in such childish behavior.
Ross Douthat today, in a column titled, "Why Trump's East Wing Demolition Had to Happen" actually argues that somehow Obama's Presidential Library is the equivalent thing to whatabout about. SMH!
I think mass protests do matter. Not necessarily because they effect change or even 2nd thoughts on the part of Republicans, but because they embolden everyone else. They give us comfort that we’re not alone and it’s ok to dissent loudly and publicly. I also remember how early protests against the Vietnam war were sparse and ‘controversial,’ but as time passed and more people joined, they grew and grew till a tipping point was reached and the majority had come to oppose the war. The lesson is, even if protests at first feel futile, they can be like the harmless snowball starting at the top of the mountain, gaining mass and momentum till they’re an unstoppable force.
I think they are very important. It is empowering to join 7+ million fellow citizens, frogs & their fabulous signs. We meet new people and talk about what to do next. We are talking reconstruction.
What is with the NYTs? The recent opinion piece, "Academia Is Broken. Trump's University 'Compact' Can Help Fix It," was execrable. Is their mantra now "viewpoint diversity equals clickbait?" Why else would they publish something so ludicrous and poorly argued by a VC billionaire bro?
They sometimes do great journalism still, but always often post absolute swill. Why? Trying to get more right-wingers to subscribe? Trying to placate Trump? Afraid of what he'll do? When your motto is "Without Fear Or Favor," you should do better.
And their "reward" for their efforts was a $15 billion dollar lawsuit. Yes, Trump has no leg to stand on but they still have to waste time and money responding to it. So they are 1) alienating their audience and 2) not gaining anything by it.
When will they realize that there is never enough ass kissing to keep trump happy. His happiness only comes from humiliating others and that drug wears off quickly.
At the risk of being a broken record, I think the only thing the NYT is going to "hear" now is a click-less silence and the sound of cancelled subscriptions. Same thing for CBS and every other media outlet that is complying in advance.
The protests in our small ( 60% maga) town, have grown in attendance with each event. Almost 500 brave souls on Saturday. We are giving each other strength thru solidarity.
I read that the nationwide protests have increased from 3M to 7M. When we reach 12 M it will be 3.5% of the nation— enough to stop any administration from succeeding. We MUST keep going.
And when our movement overwhelms the MAGAs and takes the Republicans down hard in the midterms ( despite Trump's best efforts to cheat), the NYT will take it as something "no one could have foreseen". And Bari Weiss' CBS won't cover it at all.
And definitely email them to register displeasure at the lack of coverage. I also question why there weren't "official" counts they could report on - they relied on "organizers say..." WTF
Do they matter? To Trump? No. To Republican Congress members? Probably but they’re too scared of Trump to admit it. But to many of the rest of us, they are energizing, letting us know we aren’t alone, that there are millions who hate the direction he’s leading America.
I was at No Kings in Columbia SC. It was peaceful, friendly, fun, and purposeful, and the crowd size was just confirmed at 17k! This matters, especially in a state that’s been gerrymandered red. I was dumbfounded and angered about the muted NYT coverage on the digital app and even more when I saw the print. I emailed a letter to the editor and turned instead to The Guardian.
I went to a previous protest in Columbia and this one must have had 3 or 4 times as many people. I was kind of impressed by the crowd size at the first protest, given that it is SC after all, and to see the huge increase in the crowd was very heartwarming.
Thank you so much for this column. I was disappointed in the NY Times but also disappointed in the Minneapolis Star Tribune (now called the Minnesota Star Tribune), where I was an editor and writer for more than 20 years. Nothing on Page One except a key to the Metro cover, where the photo and story ran. This despite more than 100,000 people marching through downtown Minneapolis, gathering on the very site (Commons Park) where the old Strib building stood for more than 100 years. And despite more than 70 other gatherings across the Metro and state, in small red towns as well as Duluth and Rochester. It was appalling. Infuriating. The stories on Page One were good but not timely in the least; there was no excuse for the editors to choose not to run a photo on the front. Really, really disappointed in my old paper.
As two people who used to be in the room when story placements were determined, what do you think is the reason for the perfunctory coverage on the part of these papers of record— statewide and nationwide? I’m guessing that you both may have contacts on the inside? Or perhaps the editorial side at each paper has totally turned over since you each left you insider-positions
Part of it is early deadlines--the print deadline for Sunday is something ridiculous, like 4 p.m. So they like to have the Sunday Page One planned and laid out and edited far in advance. But I think the bigger problem is lack of courage, plain and simple. I do have contacts on the inside but I have not talked to any of them about this decision. My guess is that the newsroom worker bees weren't happy with the decision but that the decision was made by top editors--but I don't really know.
I'm Irish living in Ireland and have been subscribing to NYT basically since Trump took over the GOP. I view his election win last November as the greatest act of depraved mass stupidity in history, and anyone who doesn't recognise that is part of it.
Unfortunately I see too many articles in the New York Times which treat this revolting man and his anti-democracy, anti-science, anti-humanitarian MAGA movement with undue respect.
I reluctantly continue my minimal subscription for now, although I view US media as mainly warped and toxic.
I maintain (however irrationally) hopes for the future.
I was at No Kings in Washington, DC on Saturday … I was so disheartened by the NYT coverage Sunday morning … such a disappointment … it almost took the wind out of my sails from the overall high I experienced Saturday … but I decided not to let the NYT deny the exuberance of my No Kings experience …
Instead of letting the NYT make you feel irrelevant, let's just make it irrelevant.
Every time I see Santos' name in print, I am reminded that the NYT SAT ON THE STORY until after the election. What other stories are they sitting on now?
The Philly Inquirer’s headline was what lawyers think of judges! ??Coverage of the event was good but on page 4. Headline “What could be more American than being against kings?” I agree the events are encouraging and important. I think the NYT should put Trump’s bad trolling on page one.
M'dear, that is what they want - to disappoint, and dishearten us - do not let their ignorance get in the way of your supporting our democracy. That is exactly why dt&co/minions are working to destroy freedom of the press.. if we need to we will be word of mouth.. let them shrivel to nothing and we can replace them with real newspapers! They cannot take away our joy unless we let them. Please don't go there! We are all too precious to be flummoxed by their cold-hearted disdain.
I was at the Boston No Kings rally, which was huge, energized, and age-diverse - I loved it! I’ll put my biases on my sleeve to say that mass protests like this matter enormously for sparking solidarity and collective action. At the Boston event, counter-protesters attempted to shout down Mayor Michelle Wu, Elizabeth Warren, and others, which those on the stage commented on with variations of “we see that not everyone agrees with us, but that’s how democracy works.”
I’ve long been disappointed in the NYT’s coverage of political protests, and it is no longer my paper-of-record for daily news (the Guardian is). So, I avoided looking at anything in the NYT this past weekend, because I didn’t want to drag down my own spirits. But your description and others about its below-the-fold positioning of photos and a jump link on the print front page disturbs me anew. There was no way the event I attended was not the main national story for its readership. Huge crowds spilling out of Boston Common or Times Square are newsworthy, in sharp contrast with the continuing clickbait headlines about defeated Democrats and despairing voters, especially from the NYT’s opinion section.
P.S. One side of my sign focused on “Save Public Media” and featured logos from NPR and ProPublica - many people stopped me to talk or shouted their support of NPR. People do care about journalism, but we have to fight for it now and not dismiss all efforts to collectively resist.
This is precisely the story: “Huge crowds spilling out of Boston Common or Times Square are newsworthy, in sharp contrast with the continuing clickbait headlines about defeated Democrats and despairing voters, especially from the NYT’s opinion section.”
Yes, legacy news sites like the NYT have, at the very least, been seriously compromised. I’d also add the Atlantic’s similar approach to digital clickbait headlines, which distresses me, too. As I said to some of those I spoke with at the Boston rally (regarding local NPR stations and my teaching at the Harvard Extension School), I have been emphasizing independent journalism for quite awhile, either through newsletters or via local journalism collectives (some of which Margaret has highlighted in past posts). Whenever I’m traveling, I talk to people about journalism, and it still feels like it matters to them, especially at the local level. I hold on to that :-)
The press IS free & many choose to collaborate. Their choice to become despicable sycophants puts the lie to the journalistic ethics they claim to believe or operate by.
I am from Oregon but I was visiting Boston and attended the amazing rally on Boston Commons. We'd been visiting (mostly closed) historic sites which just enhanced my appreciation for the moment. Thank you Boston and screw the NYT!
While I support local newspapers I finally had to cancel my subscription to the South Florida based Sun Sentinel due to its having no mention of the No Kings event in the Sat or Sun edition.
The founder of the hedge fund that owns the Sentinel, as well as 200+- other papers, Randall Smith is a major financial Trump supporter. This is how small local newspapers die.
I, too, was highly annoyed at the NYTimes's undercoverage of Saturday's rallies! Another thing missing from all coverage was the wit of the signage that my rallying buddies sent me: "Vaccines Cause Adulthood."..."So big even introverts are here." And held by an Elvis impersonator: "NO KING EXCEPT THIS KING!"
I was at the protest in Lexington, Ky. I was very energized by the size of the crowd. The “I love America” signs. One observation that a friend of mine had was that most of the people were middle aged and older. There were some younger people, but it seemed the vast majority were older. There was lots of honking horns and cheering from passersby! It was peaceful and we followed the laws.
The comment about people showing up at No Kings being older & white appears to be the refrain the gop has chosen since they can’t say these events were violent or poorly attended, seeing this repeated as nauseam on social media. While seniors have both the experience from the 60’s & investment in the social programs threatened, I saw a fair number of younger people at our events.
Here in Minnesota, the same! LOTS of young people. More than I'd seen or noticed at the previous NoKings rally. Standing next to me in the crowd was a beautiful trans couple applying makeup to each other; it was a tender moment and I almost photographed them but didn't want to invade their privacy.
Dismissing crowds as mostly white and older also ignores the fear that people of color, especially anyone who can be tagged on sight as “illegal,” feel about showing up in public places. There were many reports of ICE agents circulating through crowds on Saturday - whether that was true or not, the terror of being summarily grabbed and your rights taken away is very real.
I was also there and I saw a good number of young people. There seemed to be something going on at Rupp Arena - could that have been drawing them away?
Before the protests on Saturday, the editor of Times "Trust team" re-upped a piece from May on how the Times covers protests: "Focusing on the Content, Not the Count." This was presumably a warning to readers that the Times planned to minimize the No Kings protests. The editor supported this approach by arguing that estimating crowds is jdifficult for the journalists at the Times. It's an absurd approach for a news organization to take; theoretically, a two-person protest could be considered more newsworthy than seven million people. Perhaps the Times should simply "trust" its eyes and ears in its reporting rather than leaning on policy concoctions from the Trust team.
You'd think AI could estimate counts from overhead photos. That would be an actual good use of the technology, vs a video of Trump shitting on protestors
I wrote to the editor of the NYT yesterday about the lack of coverage- and perhaps others can do the same.
The news should have included the pathetic and divisive video Trump released, of a crowned Trump in a jet dumping human excrement on the marching crowds. Presidential? Peace-prize worthy?!
Let's start planning for the next one, folks. The people, united, will never be defeated.
Aside from ignoring or downplaying No Kings, the so-called liberal media has completely ignored the figurative and now literal sh-tposting coming from Trump, the White House, and all the associated apparatchiks (Leavitt and Leung answering a reporter's question with "your mom," the quote from Ms. Jackson in the article, etc.). The height of integrity and professionalism (not). These troglodytes aspire to sit at the middle school bullies' table. But 30-40% of the country loves it, apparently.
I always ask myself: "What if Biden had done it.... what if Obama had done it?" The answer is revealing.
Exactly right. I meant to include that in my comment. Complete asymmetrical coverage. To call it a double standard would be aspirational. More like quintuple…
Literal shit-posting! I hadn’t thought of the stoopid ai video that way, but now there’s no OTHER way to see it!
Sorry. I couldn’t help it. It’s completely appropriate for that fool.
Next time someone asks for the definition of shit-posting, you can show them that video.haha! But in all seriousness, it’s a total disgrace that the so-called prez has nothing better to do with his time than engage in such childish behavior.
Childish is a compliment...
After reading your comment, I also wrote the NYT. Its coverage has really become appalling.
About to cancel my subscription. A reporter referred to Ghislaine Maxwell as “Maxwell, a confidant of Epstein “ rather than convicted sex offender.
And aside from Jamelle Bouie and Michelle Goldberg, their opinion writers are awful.
Ross Douthat today, in a column titled, "Why Trump's East Wing Demolition Had to Happen" actually argues that somehow Obama's Presidential Library is the equivalent thing to whatabout about. SMH!
I think mass protests do matter. Not necessarily because they effect change or even 2nd thoughts on the part of Republicans, but because they embolden everyone else. They give us comfort that we’re not alone and it’s ok to dissent loudly and publicly. I also remember how early protests against the Vietnam war were sparse and ‘controversial,’ but as time passed and more people joined, they grew and grew till a tipping point was reached and the majority had come to oppose the war. The lesson is, even if protests at first feel futile, they can be like the harmless snowball starting at the top of the mountain, gaining mass and momentum till they’re an unstoppable force.
Adding this, from a group of crowd-estimating experts:
https://www.gelliottmorris.com/p/second-no-kings-day-protests-likely?utm_medium=web
I think they are very important. It is empowering to join 7+ million fellow citizens, frogs & their fabulous signs. We meet new people and talk about what to do next. We are talking reconstruction.
What is with the NYTs? The recent opinion piece, "Academia Is Broken. Trump's University 'Compact' Can Help Fix It," was execrable. Is their mantra now "viewpoint diversity equals clickbait?" Why else would they publish something so ludicrous and poorly argued by a VC billionaire bro?
They sometimes do great journalism still, but always often post absolute swill. Why? Trying to get more right-wingers to subscribe? Trying to placate Trump? Afraid of what he'll do? When your motto is "Without Fear Or Favor," you should do better.
And their "reward" for their efforts was a $15 billion dollar lawsuit. Yes, Trump has no leg to stand on but they still have to waste time and money responding to it. So they are 1) alienating their audience and 2) not gaining anything by it.
When will they realize that there is never enough ass kissing to keep trump happy. His happiness only comes from humiliating others and that drug wears off quickly.
It's more like trolling equals clicks.
At the risk of being a broken record, I think the only thing the NYT is going to "hear" now is a click-less silence and the sound of cancelled subscriptions. Same thing for CBS and every other media outlet that is complying in advance.
The protests in our small ( 60% maga) town, have grown in attendance with each event. Almost 500 brave souls on Saturday. We are giving each other strength thru solidarity.
I read that the nationwide protests have increased from 3M to 7M. When we reach 12 M it will be 3.5% of the nation— enough to stop any administration from succeeding. We MUST keep going.
Hands Off ~ 3 million
No Kings I ~ 5 Million
No Kings II ~ 7 Million
Our movement is growing✊
And when our movement overwhelms the MAGAs and takes the Republicans down hard in the midterms ( despite Trump's best efforts to cheat), the NYT will take it as something "no one could have foreseen". And Bari Weiss' CBS won't cover it at all.
This!! Let's get this word out, NYT and WaPo be damned.
And definitely email them to register displeasure at the lack of coverage. I also question why there weren't "official" counts they could report on - they relied on "organizers say..." WTF
Do they matter? To Trump? No. To Republican Congress members? Probably but they’re too scared of Trump to admit it. But to many of the rest of us, they are energizing, letting us know we aren’t alone, that there are millions who hate the direction he’s leading America.
As Trump weakens and protests increase, we should reach a point where more in Congress will dare to vote against Trump.
I was at No Kings in Columbia SC. It was peaceful, friendly, fun, and purposeful, and the crowd size was just confirmed at 17k! This matters, especially in a state that’s been gerrymandered red. I was dumbfounded and angered about the muted NYT coverage on the digital app and even more when I saw the print. I emailed a letter to the editor and turned instead to The Guardian.
17k is outstanding!! Congratulations!
I went to a previous protest in Columbia and this one must have had 3 or 4 times as many people. I was kind of impressed by the crowd size at the first protest, given that it is SC after all, and to see the huge increase in the crowd was very heartwarming.
Thank you so much for this column. I was disappointed in the NY Times but also disappointed in the Minneapolis Star Tribune (now called the Minnesota Star Tribune), where I was an editor and writer for more than 20 years. Nothing on Page One except a key to the Metro cover, where the photo and story ran. This despite more than 100,000 people marching through downtown Minneapolis, gathering on the very site (Commons Park) where the old Strib building stood for more than 100 years. And despite more than 70 other gatherings across the Metro and state, in small red towns as well as Duluth and Rochester. It was appalling. Infuriating. The stories on Page One were good but not timely in the least; there was no excuse for the editors to choose not to run a photo on the front. Really, really disappointed in my old paper.
Very weird
As two people who used to be in the room when story placements were determined, what do you think is the reason for the perfunctory coverage on the part of these papers of record— statewide and nationwide? I’m guessing that you both may have contacts on the inside? Or perhaps the editorial side at each paper has totally turned over since you each left you insider-positions
Part of it is early deadlines--the print deadline for Sunday is something ridiculous, like 4 p.m. So they like to have the Sunday Page One planned and laid out and edited far in advance. But I think the bigger problem is lack of courage, plain and simple. I do have contacts on the inside but I have not talked to any of them about this decision. My guess is that the newsroom worker bees weren't happy with the decision but that the decision was made by top editors--but I don't really know.
NYT asked me for feedback today, so I wrote:
I'm Irish living in Ireland and have been subscribing to NYT basically since Trump took over the GOP. I view his election win last November as the greatest act of depraved mass stupidity in history, and anyone who doesn't recognise that is part of it.
Unfortunately I see too many articles in the New York Times which treat this revolting man and his anti-democracy, anti-science, anti-humanitarian MAGA movement with undue respect.
I reluctantly continue my minimal subscription for now, although I view US media as mainly warped and toxic.
I maintain (however irrationally) hopes for the future.
Regards,
Adam Murphy
https://open.spotify.com/track/5S135NGN9w8KwONHPl8GaI
I'm disappointed in my party
I was at No Kings in Washington, DC on Saturday … I was so disheartened by the NYT coverage Sunday morning … such a disappointment … it almost took the wind out of my sails from the overall high I experienced Saturday … but I decided not to let the NYT deny the exuberance of my No Kings experience …
Instead of letting the NYT make you feel irrelevant, let's just make it irrelevant.
Every time I see Santos' name in print, I am reminded that the NYT SAT ON THE STORY until after the election. What other stories are they sitting on now?
When I checked the NYT for stories about protest. The first three stories were about George Santos.
The Philly Inquirer’s headline was what lawyers think of judges! ??Coverage of the event was good but on page 4. Headline “What could be more American than being against kings?” I agree the events are encouraging and important. I think the NYT should put Trump’s bad trolling on page one.
M'dear, that is what they want - to disappoint, and dishearten us - do not let their ignorance get in the way of your supporting our democracy. That is exactly why dt&co/minions are working to destroy freedom of the press.. if we need to we will be word of mouth.. let them shrivel to nothing and we can replace them with real newspapers! They cannot take away our joy unless we let them. Please don't go there! We are all too precious to be flummoxed by their cold-hearted disdain.
“The oppressor would not be so strong if he did not have accomplices among the oppressed.” - Simone de Beauvoir
I was at the Boston No Kings rally, which was huge, energized, and age-diverse - I loved it! I’ll put my biases on my sleeve to say that mass protests like this matter enormously for sparking solidarity and collective action. At the Boston event, counter-protesters attempted to shout down Mayor Michelle Wu, Elizabeth Warren, and others, which those on the stage commented on with variations of “we see that not everyone agrees with us, but that’s how democracy works.”
I’ve long been disappointed in the NYT’s coverage of political protests, and it is no longer my paper-of-record for daily news (the Guardian is). So, I avoided looking at anything in the NYT this past weekend, because I didn’t want to drag down my own spirits. But your description and others about its below-the-fold positioning of photos and a jump link on the print front page disturbs me anew. There was no way the event I attended was not the main national story for its readership. Huge crowds spilling out of Boston Common or Times Square are newsworthy, in sharp contrast with the continuing clickbait headlines about defeated Democrats and despairing voters, especially from the NYT’s opinion section.
P.S. One side of my sign focused on “Save Public Media” and featured logos from NPR and ProPublica - many people stopped me to talk or shouted their support of NPR. People do care about journalism, but we have to fight for it now and not dismiss all efforts to collectively resist.
This is precisely the story: “Huge crowds spilling out of Boston Common or Times Square are newsworthy, in sharp contrast with the continuing clickbait headlines about defeated Democrats and despairing voters, especially from the NYT’s opinion section.”
The collapse of an actually free press.
Yes, legacy news sites like the NYT have, at the very least, been seriously compromised. I’d also add the Atlantic’s similar approach to digital clickbait headlines, which distresses me, too. As I said to some of those I spoke with at the Boston rally (regarding local NPR stations and my teaching at the Harvard Extension School), I have been emphasizing independent journalism for quite awhile, either through newsletters or via local journalism collectives (some of which Margaret has highlighted in past posts). Whenever I’m traveling, I talk to people about journalism, and it still feels like it matters to them, especially at the local level. I hold on to that :-)
The press IS free & many choose to collaborate. Their choice to become despicable sycophants puts the lie to the journalistic ethics they claim to believe or operate by.
I am from Oregon but I was visiting Boston and attended the amazing rally on Boston Commons. We'd been visiting (mostly closed) historic sites which just enhanced my appreciation for the moment. Thank you Boston and screw the NYT!
On the NYTimes home page this morning, out of roughly 80 headlines, only one mentions the protests that swept the country this weekend. ONE.
While I support local newspapers I finally had to cancel my subscription to the South Florida based Sun Sentinel due to its having no mention of the No Kings event in the Sat or Sun edition.
The founder of the hedge fund that owns the Sentinel, as well as 200+- other papers, Randall Smith is a major financial Trump supporter. This is how small local newspapers die.
Unreal
Just cancelled my ny times sub- I was there and it matters! Democracy is worth fighting for!
I, too, was highly annoyed at the NYTimes's undercoverage of Saturday's rallies! Another thing missing from all coverage was the wit of the signage that my rallying buddies sent me: "Vaccines Cause Adulthood."..."So big even introverts are here." And held by an Elvis impersonator: "NO KING EXCEPT THIS KING!"
I was at the protest in Lexington, Ky. I was very energized by the size of the crowd. The “I love America” signs. One observation that a friend of mine had was that most of the people were middle aged and older. There were some younger people, but it seemed the vast majority were older. There was lots of honking horns and cheering from passersby! It was peaceful and we followed the laws.
The comment about people showing up at No Kings being older & white appears to be the refrain the gop has chosen since they can’t say these events were violent or poorly attended, seeing this repeated as nauseam on social media. While seniors have both the experience from the 60’s & investment in the social programs threatened, I saw a fair number of younger people at our events.
Here in Minnesota, the same! LOTS of young people. More than I'd seen or noticed at the previous NoKings rally. Standing next to me in the crowd was a beautiful trans couple applying makeup to each other; it was a tender moment and I almost photographed them but didn't want to invade their privacy.
I’m so glad. I certainly didn’t mean to upset anyone. Just wanted to make an observation. Sounds like a beautiful experience!
We were in Philadelphia. Very diverse crowd, and LOTS of young people.
Dismissing crowds as mostly white and older also ignores the fear that people of color, especially anyone who can be tagged on sight as “illegal,” feel about showing up in public places. There were many reports of ICE agents circulating through crowds on Saturday - whether that was true or not, the terror of being summarily grabbed and your rights taken away is very real.
I was also there and I saw a good number of young people. There seemed to be something going on at Rupp Arena - could that have been drawing them away?
Before the protests on Saturday, the editor of Times "Trust team" re-upped a piece from May on how the Times covers protests: "Focusing on the Content, Not the Count." This was presumably a warning to readers that the Times planned to minimize the No Kings protests. The editor supported this approach by arguing that estimating crowds is jdifficult for the journalists at the Times. It's an absurd approach for a news organization to take; theoretically, a two-person protest could be considered more newsworthy than seven million people. Perhaps the Times should simply "trust" its eyes and ears in its reporting rather than leaning on policy concoctions from the Trust team.
The Times is disingenuous.
First, journalists are not expected to count crowd numbers.
Secondly, there are plenty of sources of expert assessment including this free one:
https://open.substack.com/pub/gelliottmorris/p/second-no-kings-day-protests-likely?r=2nzz7&utm_medium=ios
You'd think AI could estimate counts from overhead photos. That would be an actual good use of the technology, vs a video of Trump shitting on protestors
This! There are officials who are trained to count crowds. Where the F were they in the news coverage? Can anyone share more about this?
I was in a small rural town in MA and would estimate 300-400 present. The 2,000 smaller protests add up, too.