Got up this morning, checked my home page and saw this, in the list of New York Times stories:
“Trump Says He Will Debate Harris”
Hmmm...why is this a front-page story? Trump already agreed to a debate — September 10, ABC, no audience, etc. So I went to the NYT home page and clicked on the article:
TRUMP PROPOSES A FOX NEWS DEBATE WITH HARRIS ON SEPTEMBER 4
According to Mr. Trump’s post on social media, the debate would take place in Pennsylvania, a crucial battleground state.
Former President Donald J. Trump said late Friday that he agreed with Fox News to debate Vice President Kamala Harris on Sept. 4, a proposal that has not yet been accepted by the Harris campaign. If it happens, it would be the second presidential debate this election cycle and the first between Mr. Trump and the new Democratic candidate.
According to Mr. Trump’s post on his social media site, Truth Social, the debate would take place at a to-be-determined location in Pennsylvania, one of the most consequential battleground states. Fox News anchors Bret Baier and Martha MacCallum would moderate.
Omigod. I’m no genius. I’ve worked as a journalist, but never at an ‘elite’ publication like the New York Times. But even I know what a wrong-headed, partisan bunch of made-up garbage this story is.
Here’ how any Journalism 1A student would have reported this story:
TRUMP BACKS OUT OF AGREED-TO DEBATE WITH HARRIS
Floats “Poison Pill” Debate with Trump-Friendly Fox News, Knowing Harris Won’t Agree.
Former President and yet-to-be sentenced convicted felon Donald J. Trump decided to break his agreement to debate Democratic nominee Kamala Harris on September 10 on ABC. Without consulting or negotiating with the Harris campaign, Trump and Fox News proposed a debate on September 4 in Pennsylvania.
Sources close to both candidates, speaking on deep background, acknowledged that this proposal was an obvious “poison pill” designed to elicit a quick thumbs-down from the Harris campaign. One Trump insider said, “This does two things for Trump. He doesn’t have to face Harris in the debate he agreed to, and he gets to say that Harris is afraid to debate him.”
When did the New York Times become a shameless, all-in propaganda bullhorn for the Trump campaign? How could they get a simple story like this so completely wrong? The article mentions the agreed-upon debate in paragraph 12 (of 13). And consider paragraph 3:
It was unclear early Saturday whether Ms. Harris had agreed to the debate and its terms. Representatives of her campaign did not respond to requests for comment. A spokeswoman for Fox News also did not respond to questions.
‘Scuse me?? “It was unclear whether Ms. Harris had agreed to the debate...” Dear New York Times — there’s this thing called ‘reporting.’ Kamala Harris has NOT agreed to this debate, because Don the Con, Aspiring Weirdo-In-Chief, made it up out of whole cloth and got his toadies at Fox News to get on board.
Who is approving these stories? Who is writing them? How can they flip the truth 180 degrees? Do they think none of their readers are noticing? Do they think Trump’s going to win, and, if so, he won’t put the NYT staff and reporters in one of his refugee concentration camps?
Why don’t they just make it official and have a line at the end of the story, “I’m Donald Trump, and I approved this message”?
UPDATE — The NYT, no doubt responding to reader outrage, has changed the story to something resembling reality:
TRUMP BACKS OUT OF ABC DEBATE AND PROPOSES ONE WITH HARRIS ON FOX
According to Mr. Trump’s post on social media, the previously scheduled debate to be hosted by ABC News was “terminated” once President Biden dropped out of the race.
(Paragraph 4) The Harris campaign on Saturday declined to commit to the Fox News debate and said it was still planning on a Sept. 10 debate hosted by ABC.
NOTE: GREAT STUFF on this over at Digby’s Pad.
