Media Bias Schadenfreude

Due to plummeting sales, there will be 100 fewer “journalists” at the New York Times:
After years of resisting the newsroom cuts that have hit most of the industry, The New York Times will bow to growing financial strain and eliminate about 100 newsroom jobs this year, the executive editor said Thursday.
The cuts will be achieved “by not filling jobs that go vacant, by offering buyouts, and if necessary by layoffs,” the executive editor, Bill Keller, said. The more people who accept buyouts, he said, “the smaller the prospect of layoffs, but we should brace ourselves for the likelihood that there will be some layoffs.” [read more]
Naturally, being the NYT, the article is misleading. Apparently they can’t even tell the truth when reporting on themselves. Contrary to their claim that they have been, “resisting the newsroom cuts that have hit most of the industry,” for years, the Times actually laid off about 750 employees just two and a half years ago, including newsroom cuts at the NYT and Boston Globe.
I am usually loathe to take joy in others suffering, but it couldn’t happen to a more deserving group. Perhaps now they can find jobs more appropriate for their propagandist talents. Perhaps al Qaeda is hiring.































I bet the NYT still employs editors who would spot your glaring grammatical error. How many less journalists? About 100 FEWER journalists.
I often find that the most vocal critics of mainstream media once wanted to be real journalists themselves, but will always remain wannabes.
Thanks for the correction, but I assure you I have no interest in being a “journalist”. I am, however, deeply concerned when people who call themselves journalists do not accurately report the truth, or are otherwise dishonest with the public.
Unfortunately, a concern that kool-aid drinkers such as yourself obviously do not share. And I would much rather make an occasional grammatical error than be an apologist for people who so blatantly and demonstrably lie to the public, as you are, which is absolutely repugnant.