"I left to stay true to my byline"
January 28, 2025 8:11 PM Subscribe
Paul Krugman on leaving the New York Times: "One more thing: I faced attempts from others to dictate what I could (and could not) write about, usually in the form, “You’ve already written about that,” as if it never takes more than one column to effectively cover a subject. If that had been the rule during my earlier tenure, I never would have been able to press the case for Obamacare, or against Social Security privatization, and—most alarmingly—against the Iraq invasion. Moreover, all Times opinion writers were banned from engaging in any kind of media criticism. Hardly the kind of rule that would allow an opinion writer to state, “we are being lied into war.” I felt that my byline was being used to create a storyline that was no longer mine. So I left. On a somewhat different issue, it became clear to me that the management I was dealing with didn’t understand the difference between having an opinion and having an informed, factually sourced opinion."
Krugman was not a good solider (to say the least) in the NYT mission of helping DJT get reelected, so no shock he was getting the squeeze and was eventually convinced to quit.
posted by Back At It Again At Krispy Kreme at 9:02 PM on January 28 [14 favorites]
posted by Back At It Again At Krispy Kreme at 9:02 PM on January 28 [14 favorites]
I began to feel that I was putting more effort—especially emotional energy—into fixing editorial damage than I was into writing the original articles. And the end result of the back and forth often felt flat and colorless.
Well, at least now we know it's on purpose!
posted by kittens for breakfast at 9:10 PM on January 28 [13 favorites]
Well, at least now we know it's on purpose!
posted by kittens for breakfast at 9:10 PM on January 28 [13 favorites]
One more thing: I faced attempts from others to dictate what I could (and could not) write about, usually in the form, “You’ve already written about that,” as if it never takes more than one column to effectively cover a subject.
Maybe it's because Krugman wanted to keep pumping out hot doomer takes on bitcoin or the benefits of inflation and the Times, realising his 'factually sourced opinions' on both have aged like milk, wanted some fresh material of which he was unable to deliver.
posted by neonamber at 9:48 PM on January 28 [1 favorite]
Maybe it's because Krugman wanted to keep pumping out hot doomer takes on bitcoin or the benefits of inflation and the Times, realising his 'factually sourced opinions' on both have aged like milk, wanted some fresh material of which he was unable to deliver.
posted by neonamber at 9:48 PM on January 28 [1 favorite]
Krugman may or may not suck, I don't read him, but the claim that the NYT did something wise like dump him for "fresh material" is going to need some kind of evidence to back it up in light of all the bullshit they've been on for the past... 20 years?
posted by axiom at 9:51 PM on January 28 [18 favorites]
posted by axiom at 9:51 PM on January 28 [18 favorites]
what’s a cold take on bitcoin?
posted by hototogisu at 10:17 PM on January 28 [30 favorites]
posted by hototogisu at 10:17 PM on January 28 [30 favorites]
Krugman is a hell of a lot better and more informative reading than low information and high posture drive-by shade throwing, no matter how zeitgeisty slang like "hot doomer takes" slings.
And fax machine mistakes don't make Crypto is For Criming wrong, though I'm up for another round of panning for gold in that particular shitpasture.
Also the idea that modest controlled inflation is good has aged pretty well over a half dozen decades where monetary policy has delivered better results than the previous century.
Populism is having a moment and our fortunes are unfortunately along for the ride but that doesn't mean our minds have to follow.
posted by weston at 10:56 PM on January 28 [39 favorites]
And fax machine mistakes don't make Crypto is For Criming wrong, though I'm up for another round of panning for gold in that particular shitpasture.
Also the idea that modest controlled inflation is good has aged pretty well over a half dozen decades where monetary policy has delivered better results than the previous century.
Populism is having a moment and our fortunes are unfortunately along for the ride but that doesn't mean our minds have to follow.
posted by weston at 10:56 PM on January 28 [39 favorites]
The only thing that's going to age like milk is bitcoin.
posted by Pendragon at 11:26 PM on January 28 [30 favorites]
posted by Pendragon at 11:26 PM on January 28 [30 favorites]
...going to need some kind of evidence to back it up...
Krugman predicted that markets would "never recover" given the 2016 US election outcome and instead it went on a years long bull run.
Since 2013 he's repeatedly written off bitcoin as a bubble and useless technology and instead usage seems to be snowballing.
He downplayed concerns about inflation in 2021, describing it as "transitory" and contrary to this prediction inflation increased significantly and remained high for years globally.
I just don't think he's particularly skilled at forecasting economic systems given my exposure to his writing over the years and hindsight.
posted by neonamber at 11:28 PM on January 28 [2 favorites]
Krugman predicted that markets would "never recover" given the 2016 US election outcome and instead it went on a years long bull run.
Since 2013 he's repeatedly written off bitcoin as a bubble and useless technology and instead usage seems to be snowballing.
He downplayed concerns about inflation in 2021, describing it as "transitory" and contrary to this prediction inflation increased significantly and remained high for years globally.
I just don't think he's particularly skilled at forecasting economic systems given my exposure to his writing over the years and hindsight.
posted by neonamber at 11:28 PM on January 28 [2 favorites]
Krugman predicted that markets would "never recover" given the 2016 US election outcome and instead it went on a years long bull run.
This one, you get - although I think Krugman's prediction was based on Trump's administration being more effective than it was. Essentially, he was predicting that the first Trump administration would be conducted more like the second one is starting out.
Since 2013 he's repeatedly written off bitcoin as a bubble and useless technology and instead usage seems to be snowballing.
"Usage" of bitcoin isn't snowballing, because it isn't used for anything: the early attempts to actually try and use it as a currency have completely petered out. It has become a strictly speculative asset with its value tied to absolutely nothing. That is more or less the definition of a bubble, and if we define a loss of value of more than 50% in less than a week as a "crash," bitcoin has crashed five times since 2013.
He downplayed concerns about inflation in 2021, describing it as "transitory" and contrary to this prediction inflation increased significantly and remained high for years globally.
By any reasonable definition inflation was transitory, because the inflation period in most countries lasted about two years and never even came close to hyperinflation.
posted by mightygodking at 1:09 AM on January 29 [62 favorites]
This one, you get - although I think Krugman's prediction was based on Trump's administration being more effective than it was. Essentially, he was predicting that the first Trump administration would be conducted more like the second one is starting out.
Since 2013 he's repeatedly written off bitcoin as a bubble and useless technology and instead usage seems to be snowballing.
"Usage" of bitcoin isn't snowballing, because it isn't used for anything: the early attempts to actually try and use it as a currency have completely petered out. It has become a strictly speculative asset with its value tied to absolutely nothing. That is more or less the definition of a bubble, and if we define a loss of value of more than 50% in less than a week as a "crash," bitcoin has crashed five times since 2013.
He downplayed concerns about inflation in 2021, describing it as "transitory" and contrary to this prediction inflation increased significantly and remained high for years globally.
By any reasonable definition inflation was transitory, because the inflation period in most countries lasted about two years and never even came close to hyperinflation.
posted by mightygodking at 1:09 AM on January 29 [62 favorites]
it became clear to me that the management I was dealing with didn’t understand the difference between having an opinion and having an informed, factually sourced opinion
You can't push garbage conservative propaganda in your opinion pages if you require the latter.
posted by Gelatin at 4:03 AM on January 29 [10 favorites]
You can't push garbage conservative propaganda in your opinion pages if you require the latter.
posted by Gelatin at 4:03 AM on January 29 [10 favorites]
The idea that a given topic must only be written about once apparently does not apply to the NYT's ongoing efforts to contribute to the marginalization and eventual genocide of trans people.
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:17 AM on January 29 [32 favorites]
posted by Pope Guilty at 4:17 AM on January 29 [32 favorites]
Or, for that matter, "this Midwestern guy in a diner is a Nazi, here's why you should see things from his point of view," columns. Lots and lots of those are just fine.
Not at all shocked to hear testimony that editorial leadership at the NYT was exactly who we thought they were.
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 4:36 AM on January 29 [24 favorites]
Not at all shocked to hear testimony that editorial leadership at the NYT was exactly who we thought they were.
posted by Smedly, Butlerian jihadi at 4:36 AM on January 29 [24 favorites]
"Usage" of bitcoin isn't snowballing...
Sure sure, if you narrow your definition of 'use' just right then, no one is using it for nothing! Because volatile!
Come now, hundreds of millions worth of USD is flowing into bitcoin on the daily now. It IS being used as a store of value now. If you want to believe otherwise you're living in alternative facts land.
By any reasonable definition inflation was transitory, because the inflation period in most countries lasted about two years and never even came close to hyperinflation.
Sorry to burst your bubble but Krugman himself admitted he was wrong on this, stating:
In early 2021 there was an intense debate among economists about the likely consequences of the American Rescue Plan, the $1.9 trillion package enacted by a new Democratic president and a (barely) Democratic Congress. Some warned that the package would be dangerously inflationary; others were fairly relaxed. I was Team Relaxed. As it turned out, of course, that was a very bad call.
posted by neonamber at 4:41 AM on January 29 [2 favorites]
Sure sure, if you narrow your definition of 'use' just right then, no one is using it for nothing! Because volatile!
Come now, hundreds of millions worth of USD is flowing into bitcoin on the daily now. It IS being used as a store of value now. If you want to believe otherwise you're living in alternative facts land.
By any reasonable definition inflation was transitory, because the inflation period in most countries lasted about two years and never even came close to hyperinflation.
Sorry to burst your bubble but Krugman himself admitted he was wrong on this, stating:
In early 2021 there was an intense debate among economists about the likely consequences of the American Rescue Plan, the $1.9 trillion package enacted by a new Democratic president and a (barely) Democratic Congress. Some warned that the package would be dangerously inflationary; others were fairly relaxed. I was Team Relaxed. As it turned out, of course, that was a very bad call.
posted by neonamber at 4:41 AM on January 29 [2 favorites]
The article I pulled the quote from is titled "I Was Wrong About Inflation" by Paul Krugman.
posted by neonamber at 4:45 AM on January 29 [4 favorites]
posted by neonamber at 4:45 AM on January 29 [4 favorites]
And how many of your favorite opinion writers publicly review their past predictions?
posted by at by at 4:59 AM on January 29 [13 favorites]
posted by at by at 4:59 AM on January 29 [13 favorites]
Regardless of whether you buy his stuff wholesale, I'm very glad he's called the heavy handed bias at the NYT, the nation's "flagship" media, for what it is.
He could have gone quietly to spend more time with his family. But he didn't. This won't get the coverage and recognition that it should given the capitalized media that we have, but I'm grateful anyway.
posted by Dashy at 5:14 AM on January 29 [14 favorites]
He could have gone quietly to spend more time with his family. But he didn't. This won't get the coverage and recognition that it should given the capitalized media that we have, but I'm grateful anyway.
posted by Dashy at 5:14 AM on January 29 [14 favorites]
And how many of your favorite opinion writers publicly review their past predictions?
I don't really have a favourite but Krugman isn't the only contributer at NYT reviewing their past predictions.
posted by neonamber at 5:25 AM on January 29
I don't really have a favourite but Krugman isn't the only contributer at NYT reviewing their past predictions.
posted by neonamber at 5:25 AM on January 29
I always wonder about these things who the other person is - what's their name, what's their context? What lead to them acting these ways? We recognise the effects but the details remain nebulous.
posted by treblekicker at 5:42 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
posted by treblekicker at 5:42 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
Come now, hundreds of millions worth of USD is flowing into bitcoin on the daily now. It IS being used as a store of value now.
Yes, by fascists. Look at who's promoting bitcoin and then ask yourself: "Aren't they the baddies?"
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:48 AM on January 29 [21 favorites]
Yes, by fascists. Look at who's promoting bitcoin and then ask yourself: "Aren't they the baddies?"
posted by RonButNotStupid at 5:48 AM on January 29 [21 favorites]
i always respected krugman for being one of the only mainstream voices against the iraq war, a position that took genuine courage in bush’s america. i don’t know what happened at the new york times but it seems like their editorial leadership had been completely captured by the right wing, (only jamelle bouie writes sensible columns) and are using their status as the newspaper of record to legitimize the barbarism of the genocide in gaza and will likely also give that nice newsprint shine to the horrors that await us. i don’t even know what i’m supposed to do anymore to find out what’s happening in the world.
also let’s not argue about bitcoin here
posted by dis_integration at 5:54 AM on January 29 [18 favorites]
also let’s not argue about bitcoin here
posted by dis_integration at 5:54 AM on January 29 [18 favorites]
Surprised no one yet noted this part:
One last bit, which most but not all of us may know: Krugman won the Nobel Prize for economics, in 2008. I'm not saying that makes him infallible, but he's infinitely better informed about his subject matter than the typical bloviator with a slot on the opinion pages.
(also, if people want to debate bitcoin again, please consider making a post about bitcoin prospects under the new administration and taing it there.)
posted by martin q blank at 6:09 AM on January 29 [14 favorites]
Yet what I felt during my final year at the Times was a push toward blandness, toward avoiding saying anything too directly in a way that might get some people (particularly on the right) riled up. I guess my question is, if those are the ground rules, why even bother having an opinion section?Also worth repeating this:
Also in 2024, the editing of my regular columns went from light touch to extremely intrusive. I went from one level of editing to three, with an immediate editor and his superior both weighing in on the column, and sometimes doing substantial rewrites before it went to copy.For a year or two, I was copy editor and designer for the opinion pages at a small newspaper. For the "trusted" columnists (usually syndicated wire columns), I was the only editor. I'd read them, find ways to trim them if needed, and write the headlines-- pretty much what Krugman describes as the pre-2024 routine. The ones that made management nervous? The managing editor would read them before they came to me.
One last bit, which most but not all of us may know: Krugman won the Nobel Prize for economics, in 2008. I'm not saying that makes him infallible, but he's infinitely better informed about his subject matter than the typical bloviator with a slot on the opinion pages.
(also, if people want to debate bitcoin again, please consider making a post about bitcoin prospects under the new administration and taing it there.)
posted by martin q blank at 6:09 AM on January 29 [14 favorites]
I always wonder about these things who the other person is - what's their name, what's their context?
Do you mean, who is Paul Krugman?
The bit about multiple layers of editors is interesting given the overall move to less proofreading and editing (and, possibly, factchecking), because why waste money on that when clicks aren't driven by quality.
posted by trig at 6:19 AM on January 29 [2 favorites]
Do you mean, who is Paul Krugman?
The bit about multiple layers of editors is interesting given the overall move to less proofreading and editing (and, possibly, factchecking), because why waste money on that when clicks aren't driven by quality.
posted by trig at 6:19 AM on January 29 [2 favorites]
About 10-15 years ago I got on a bit of an economics kick and read a bunch of Krugman's books including the ones collecting his columns, and it was really fascinating to watch him basically get "radicalized" in real time in his early years. Where he started out going, "Well, I'm a "liberal" New Keynesian, the Bush administration is conservative trickle-down supply-siders, I'm sure we'll have some good faith disagreements about economic theories and practices" and then an increasing number of "Hmmmm, the administration's maths don't seem to be mathing" and eventually a bunch of "Holy shit these guys are just making stuff up."
posted by soundguy99 at 6:41 AM on January 29 [19 favorites]
posted by soundguy99 at 6:41 AM on January 29 [19 favorites]
I always wonder about these things who the other person is - what's their name, what's their context?
Do you mean, who is Paul Krugman?
Um no :)
It's the other stuff you mentioned in the rest of your reply. It's been said lots of times recently that there's kowtowing by the media around the election etc, but it's always unclear the precise details behind the scenes of who did this? How? What was said? What wasn't said?
This is by design but nevertheless I can't help wonder. That's what I find useful in Krugman's piece. It gives a small amount of insight. Not much but that's still interesting - what levers were pulled, how they were pulled, by whom etc.
posted by treblekicker at 7:04 AM on January 29
Do you mean, who is Paul Krugman?
Um no :)
It's the other stuff you mentioned in the rest of your reply. It's been said lots of times recently that there's kowtowing by the media around the election etc, but it's always unclear the precise details behind the scenes of who did this? How? What was said? What wasn't said?
This is by design but nevertheless I can't help wonder. That's what I find useful in Krugman's piece. It gives a small amount of insight. Not much but that's still interesting - what levers were pulled, how they were pulled, by whom etc.
posted by treblekicker at 7:04 AM on January 29
Since 2013 he's repeatedly written off bitcoin as a bubble and useless technology and instead usage seems to be snowballing.
Amway and Mary Kay are still around and as profitable as ever. What's your point, exactly? That he should have told people to get in on the ponzi scam early so they could make lots of money?
posted by AlSweigart at 7:14 AM on January 29 [16 favorites]
Amway and Mary Kay are still around and as profitable as ever. What's your point, exactly? That he should have told people to get in on the ponzi scam early so they could make lots of money?
posted by AlSweigart at 7:14 AM on January 29 [16 favorites]
Not much but that's still interesting - what levers were pulled, how they were pulled, by whom etc.
Now I get it :-) You're right, I always wonder about those things too. Less about how this happens at profit-driven companies, where I guess the answer is largely in the question, but about cases where there's some politician or reformer who does actually seem to have convictions and care about doing good things, but then upon getting power ends up either changing their mind explicitly or just letting a lot of problematic stuff go, making milquetoast efforts, etc. How much of that comes from within and how much is a result of external pressures, and if so what do they look like and how are they exerted...
posted by trig at 7:35 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
Now I get it :-) You're right, I always wonder about those things too. Less about how this happens at profit-driven companies, where I guess the answer is largely in the question, but about cases where there's some politician or reformer who does actually seem to have convictions and care about doing good things, but then upon getting power ends up either changing their mind explicitly or just letting a lot of problematic stuff go, making milquetoast efforts, etc. How much of that comes from within and how much is a result of external pressures, and if so what do they look like and how are they exerted...
posted by trig at 7:35 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
Another guy stuck with bad bosses. Join the club, Paul!
posted by kozad at 7:42 AM on January 29 [2 favorites]
posted by kozad at 7:42 AM on January 29 [2 favorites]
By any reasonable definition inflation was transitory
I’m not sure there is a clear definition of “transitory inflation” but I think a lot of people who ran with that language (which I think started with the Fed?) regretted it, because inflation was less transitory and less self-resolving than they had expected.
posted by atoxyl at 7:56 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
I’m not sure there is a clear definition of “transitory inflation” but I think a lot of people who ran with that language (which I think started with the Fed?) regretted it, because inflation was less transitory and less self-resolving than they had expected.
posted by atoxyl at 7:56 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
What's your point?
My point was that maybe the Times was tired of Mr "by 2005, it would become clear that the Internet's effect on the economy is no greater than the fax machine's" and his brand of neoluddism that finds itself increasingly at odds with emerging financial trends.
posted by neonamber at 8:28 AM on January 29
My point was that maybe the Times was tired of Mr "by 2005, it would become clear that the Internet's effect on the economy is no greater than the fax machine's" and his brand of neoluddism that finds itself increasingly at odds with emerging financial trends.
posted by neonamber at 8:28 AM on January 29
Whole lot of comments about not TFA so much as arguing about Krugman.
And if we're arguing about Krugman, it needs to be noted that Krugman at least is able to admit he was wrong about things.
I've seen a couple of dings at Krugman for having been wrong about this or that, but did you ever notice he admitted being wrong, and pointed out what he'd learned?
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 8:31 AM on January 29 [9 favorites]
And if we're arguing about Krugman, it needs to be noted that Krugman at least is able to admit he was wrong about things.
I've seen a couple of dings at Krugman for having been wrong about this or that, but did you ever notice he admitted being wrong, and pointed out what he'd learned?
posted by Aardvark Cheeselog at 8:31 AM on January 29 [9 favorites]
and his brand of neoluddism that finds itself increasingly at odds with emerging financial trends.
Emerging financial trends like cryptocurrencies?
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:47 AM on January 29 [7 favorites]
Emerging financial trends like cryptocurrencies?
posted by RonButNotStupid at 8:47 AM on January 29 [7 favorites]
I cannot speak to economic anything, but the stuff he reports about the paper editing the heck out of him is very concerning to me.
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:23 AM on January 29 [5 favorites]
posted by jenfullmoon at 9:23 AM on January 29 [5 favorites]
by 2005, it would become clear that the Internet's effect on the economy is no greater than the fax machine's
For fuck's sake, he made that prediction in 1998. When we were all still on fucking dial up.
In, ironically, an article about how tough it is for economists to accurately predict the long term effects of technology.
Get outta here with your crypto bro nonsense.
posted by soundguy99 at 9:50 AM on January 29 [23 favorites]
For fuck's sake, he made that prediction in 1998. When we were all still on fucking dial up.
In, ironically, an article about how tough it is for economists to accurately predict the long term effects of technology.
Get outta here with your crypto bro nonsense.
posted by soundguy99 at 9:50 AM on January 29 [23 favorites]
Defending crypto always comes off as the funniest stuff. I’m reminded of The Big Short when we think about the prediction on the 2016 election and market crashing… in the film, the housing market is clearly belly up but the banks who are what rated the bonds wouldn’t mark them down and value kept increasing. It defied all logic and sense and reality.
Anyway, the NYT must be a miserable place to work now if you have values.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 10:21 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
Anyway, the NYT must be a miserable place to work now if you have values.
posted by OnTheLastCastle at 10:21 AM on January 29 [1 favorite]
If there's such a thing as a thinker who's always right in their predictions, I haven't come across them. But right or wrong, Krugman always seemed to be making a serious effort to understand things, often through real research that he was particularly well-qualified to do, and to think them through carefully and honestly. Which can't be said of other longtime columnists like Ross Douthat or Bret Stephens (and others), who can be relied on to pick and choose and twist facts and ideas to reach whatever conclusion they were aiming for.
Even the fact that Krugman bothers reviewing his own past predictions and criticizing his own track record is a sign of a kind of honesty that a serious paper would prioritize rather than drive away.
posted by trig at 10:28 AM on January 29 [6 favorites]
Even the fact that Krugman bothers reviewing his own past predictions and criticizing his own track record is a sign of a kind of honesty that a serious paper would prioritize rather than drive away.
posted by trig at 10:28 AM on January 29 [6 favorites]
Also, the “You’ve already written about that” bit was interesting and reminded me of what the Washington Post’s opinions editor, David Shipley, said after Ann Telnaes, a Pulitzer-winning editorial cartoonist, quit the Post after he refused to run a cartoon she drew criticizing Bezos (not long after they also refused to make an endorsement in the presidential race for a transparently ass-covering reason).
He said “the only bias was against repetition”, and “My decision was guided by the fact that we had just published a column on the same topic as the cartoon and had already scheduled another column – this one a satire – for publication.”
Maybe the NYT could use the same reasoning to stop Pamela Paul (Bret Stephen's ex-wife, because nothing says "diversity of views" like platforming two members of the same family) from repeatedly writing anti-trans stuff, or to stop leaving her columns on the online front page for days on end. Since the only bias is against repetition.
posted by trig at 10:38 AM on January 29 [9 favorites]
He said “the only bias was against repetition”, and “My decision was guided by the fact that we had just published a column on the same topic as the cartoon and had already scheduled another column – this one a satire – for publication.”
Maybe the NYT could use the same reasoning to stop Pamela Paul (Bret Stephen's ex-wife, because nothing says "diversity of views" like platforming two members of the same family) from repeatedly writing anti-trans stuff, or to stop leaving her columns on the online front page for days on end. Since the only bias is against repetition.
posted by trig at 10:38 AM on January 29 [9 favorites]
Since the only bias is against repetition.
This also apparently wasn't an issue when they published approximately 37,000 front-page "news analysis" pieces between 2020 and 2024 on the theme of "Joe Biden Is Way Too Old".
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:16 PM on January 29 [6 favorites]
This also apparently wasn't an issue when they published approximately 37,000 front-page "news analysis" pieces between 2020 and 2024 on the theme of "Joe Biden Is Way Too Old".
posted by Artifice_Eternity at 1:16 PM on January 29 [6 favorites]
Come now, hundreds of millions worth of USD is flowing into bitcoin on the daily now. It IS being used as a store of value now.
I bet there were Dutch guys in 1635 saying something like this about tulip bulbs.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 2:08 PM on January 29 [12 favorites]
I bet there were Dutch guys in 1635 saying something like this about tulip bulbs.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 2:08 PM on January 29 [12 favorites]
I like Krugman, I always learned a lot from him. He alway struck me as very principled - unlike every other damn columnist at the crapfest NYT (except for Bouille, he's terrific too).
After subscribing to garbage pile of oligarch sycophants for 25 years, it was so cathartic to tell them to fuck off. When Teen Vogue eats your lunch over and over again, maybe try a new tactic? Or I guess sycophant harder?
Looking forward to the day when the love of their life, god-emperor trump takes their shitty paper away from Sulzberger and Kahn. That will obviously be after the trumpists cause mind numbing harm to innocent vulnerable people, but I will cop to quite a bit of anticipatory Schadenfreude there.
posted by WatTylerJr at 3:53 PM on January 29 [1 favorite]
After subscribing to garbage pile of oligarch sycophants for 25 years, it was so cathartic to tell them to fuck off. When Teen Vogue eats your lunch over and over again, maybe try a new tactic? Or I guess sycophant harder?
Looking forward to the day when the love of their life, god-emperor trump takes their shitty paper away from Sulzberger and Kahn. That will obviously be after the trumpists cause mind numbing harm to innocent vulnerable people, but I will cop to quite a bit of anticipatory Schadenfreude there.
posted by WatTylerJr at 3:53 PM on January 29 [1 favorite]
Get outta here with your crypto bro nonsense.
Get outta here with the pointlessly gendered misnomer.
I'm not anyone's 'bro' and my pronouns are she/her.
posted by neonamber at 6:18 PM on January 29
Get outta here with the pointlessly gendered misnomer.
I'm not anyone's 'bro' and my pronouns are she/her.
posted by neonamber at 6:18 PM on January 29
I think Krugman can take pride in the almost undeniable fact that they knew they couldn't get away with firing him.
They had to jack him around 'til he quit because they were that afraid of the blowback from giving him the boot.
posted by jamjam at 6:31 PM on January 29 [3 favorites]
They had to jack him around 'til he quit because they were that afraid of the blowback from giving him the boot.
posted by jamjam at 6:31 PM on January 29 [3 favorites]
I'm not anyone's 'bro' and my pronouns are she/her.
Okay, then enough of the crypto SIS nonsense.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:59 PM on January 29 [9 favorites]
Okay, then enough of the crypto SIS nonsense.
posted by EmpressCallipygos at 6:59 PM on January 29 [9 favorites]
Wasn't it during the debate that Trump started talking about Harris’ sexual history and ended up saying he "heard she puts out"?
Now tell me you don't think he has something on Sulzberger.
Because that's Trump’s cryptocurrency of choice, right there.
posted by jamjam at 7:29 PM on January 29
Now tell me you don't think he has something on Sulzberger.
Because that's Trump’s cryptocurrency of choice, right there.
posted by jamjam at 7:29 PM on January 29
Since the only bias is against repetition.
This also apparently wasn't an issue when they published approximately 37,000 front-page "news analysis" pieces between 2020 and 2024 on the theme of "Joe Biden Is Way Too Old".
Not to mention the NYT's relentless anti-trans crusade.
posted by Gelatin at 6:24 AM on January 30 [3 favorites]
This also apparently wasn't an issue when they published approximately 37,000 front-page "news analysis" pieces between 2020 and 2024 on the theme of "Joe Biden Is Way Too Old".
Not to mention the NYT's relentless anti-trans crusade.
posted by Gelatin at 6:24 AM on January 30 [3 favorites]
I'm glad I just signed up for his substack (though bleh, substack): his take on the Fed work "buyout" is the best I've read so far.
posted by ropeladder at 6:51 AM on January 30 [1 favorite]
posted by ropeladder at 6:51 AM on January 30 [1 favorite]
what’s a cold take on bitcoin?
I guess my coldest take is from when I first heard about it. That it sounds like Jim Bell inspired it.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 12:44 PM on January 30
I guess my coldest take is from when I first heard about it. That it sounds like Jim Bell inspired it.
posted by rhamphorhynchus at 12:44 PM on January 30
You can get his email subscription I prefer to just look for his articles when there's a specific issue like inflation or a twin deficit problem
posted by Narrative_Historian at 12:28 AM on January 31
posted by Narrative_Historian at 12:28 AM on January 31
« Older The Most Beautiful Boy in the World | Domestic colonialism Newer »
Also in 2024, the editing of my regular columns went from light touch to extremely intrusive.
To mute critics of Trump in the final, crucial weeks of the campaign, of course.
I can't remember how long it's been since I even looked at the utterly craven NYT, but at the end, Krugman kept me hanging around for six months to a year all by himself.
posted by jamjam at 8:54 PM on January 28 [18 favorites]