all 6 comments

[–]HugodeCrevellier 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

The NYT does not clumsily 'ban' Journalists
(to the extent that any remain at the NYT)
from using accurate words
('Genocide', 'Occupation' and 'Palestine').

As masters of lies and experts at doublespeak,
they merely instead imply that telling the truth
might be detrimental to your continued employment.

You see, they just want their 'journalists' to
keep spewing bullshit ... errr ... use alternative terms,
you know, for 'better clarity and accuracy', of course. :/

[–]Jiminy 2 insightful - 1 fun2 insightful - 0 fun3 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Good. Not genocide

[–]SMCAB 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (1 child)

NY times banned journalists?

There are no journalists there. The NY times isn't performing journalism.

[–]HiddenFox 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

^ This. Anyone who thinks the NY Times is journalism is fooling themselves.

[–]neolib 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

[–]UncleWillard56 1 insightful - 1 fun1 insightful - 0 fun2 insightful - 1 fun -  (0 children)

Not a fan of banning, but none of those words are accurate in describing the Israel-Hamas War.