RADAR Alert: NYT Ignores RADAR Requests, Profits Drop 21%

	posted by Matt on 09:28 PM April 20th, 2005
	To say the New York Times is obsessed with domestic violence against women is an understatement. A search of the NYT database reveals over 337,000 “hits” on the phrase “violence against women” just since 1996! The Times has gotten in a lot of hot water for its long-standing anti-male and other forms of bias. Visit the Times Watch at http://www.timeswatch.com/ and you will see the many ways that the NYT slants, distorts, filters, and otherwise biases the truth. Click "Read more..." for more.

	Last week, RADAR launched an ambitious campaign for the Times to report both sides of the domestic violence issue. But the NYT didn’t even respond to RADAR’s request. Earlier this week, it was reported that first-quarter profits at the Times dropped 21%. (Of course, we’re not trying to imply that ignoring last week’s request caused the Times’ profits to plummet – but clearly, things are not well at the NYT.) So this week we continued our campaign. On Tuesday, we asked persons to telephone the Times at 212-556-7652. On Wednesday, we asked people to e-mail their complaint to the editors and reporters at the NYT. A listing of their e-mail addresses can be found here. Thursday is the last day of the campaign. This is what we are asking you to do: Open a new message in your e-mail program and in the To line, enter: letters@nytimes.com. In the Subject line, put “Sweden Boldly Exposes a Secret Side of Women’s Lives, April 6” In the Message box, write whatever you want to say about the article, and include the request that the NYT retract the article and assure balanced reporting of DV in the future. Indicate your name, address, and telephone number. Remember to keep your letter short, factual, and reasonable. If you prefer, send your letter by snail-mail to this address: Letters to the Editor New York Times 229 West 43rd Street New York, NY 10036 The New York Times campaign is not finished! RADAR will hold a protest of the Times on Saturday, April 30 at the White House Correspondents Dinner at the Washington Hilton, 1919 Connecticut Ave., NW, Washington, DC 20009. 4:00 – 8:00pm. More information about the protest will be posted on the RADAR website. RADAR thanks every person who made complaints to the New York Times, and made this campaign a success! ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Date of RADAR Release: April 20, 2005 Respecting Accuracy in Domestic Abuse Reporting (RADAR) is a coalition of men and women working to assure media balance and accuracy in coverage of the domestic violence issue. More information can be found at: http://www.mediaradar.org/

<  Recent Deadly Paris Fire Started by Woman During Domestic Dispute | Report Of Rape A Hoax, Cops Say  >

  

This discussion has been archived. No new comments can be posted.

really working??? (Score:1) by Indiana Jones on 11:26 PM April 20th, 2005 EST (#1) Over the past 3 days, i have sent about a dozen e-mails to various NYT addresses, i have also called and complained. One of my cousin works as an intern at NYT, but she told me she did not hear any reports of complaints against DV articles! Either NYT is quashing those e-mail/phone complains or we are not turning up the heat.   I want EVERYone...EVERYONE to send at least 3 e-mails to NYT. By the time the editor opens the box...the scroll bar should be at most 1mm thick.

Re:really working??? (Score:1) by canaryguy (nospam.canaryguy@nospam.stealthfool.com) on 08:11 AM April 21st, 2005 EST (#2) One of my cousin works as an intern at NYT, but she told me she did not hear any reports of complaints against DV articles! Either NYT is quashing those e-mail/phone complains or we are not turning up the heat. I work in IT and I know that they can filter their e-mail upon initial receipt. The tools exist to clean/delete e-mails from mailboxes after receipt as well. And of course they could be furiously adding us to blacklists as well... But I see a few possibilities here... 1. They're filtering their e-mail. But not so much as the auto-reply mailboxes don't send us e-mail back. 2. The NYT's policy is to not talk about activism against them at work. Maybe a better place to gauge impacts is the favored watering holes for the NYT... 3. Don't take offense, I've never met you... But you could be a NYT or feminist plant out to discourage us.

I would say yes, though very slowly (Score:0) by Anonymous User on 04:09 PM April 21st, 2005 EST (#3) One of the top editors has responded to a certain person's email, and there appears to be some discussion between that editor and the president of a certain organization that is friendly toward men's rights (not a "men's rights group itself but one that is on our side and knows the stats very well). I can't say who it is. Some can probably guess. But this may be a good sign. I too have sent lots of emails, to all of the staffers' emails on the list, and also sent them the MND article. I got two responses from low-level staffers. The first one asked to be removed from the list, and then threw in a thoughtless comment that U.S. Stats are irrelevant to Europe DV. I answered and showed why he's wrong (the article refered to "all societies"; some of the data in the Fiebert bibl. is international in scope, including Sweden; etc.) and I then sent another letter to all of the NYT emails (including him) showing how they ignored SWEDISH research, and I cited the Swedish study from Fiebert's bibl. and gave the link, etc. He never responded. The second one, who seemed sincere, said he had no stake in the debate but suggested it would be more effective if I/we sounded less accusatory and more like "please consider this" (although that's how I thought I was sounding). We exchanged back and forth for a while. Not much there either. The fact that two low level staffers (or whatever they were) responded, and a high-up editor has responded too, means at least some of them are hearing. I would think among those who do listen, very few actually respond. I could be wrong, but that's my speculation. I'm told there is still some dialogue going on with that high-up editor and the men's-rights-friendly group I mentioned above. And RADAR still has more in store. Meanwhile I think we should keep sending the emails and I'm thankful to everyone who has participated here. It took a while, but I by being persistent I have gotten the Los Angeles Daily Journal editors to go from "nobody believes this but you, Marc" to finally recognizing and printing my letters and even changing their language, which is a good start. We can do this with enough persistence, and every letter counts. Marc A.

Re:I would say yes, though very slowly (Score:1) by Gang-banged on 02:49 AM April 22nd, 2005 EST (#4) (User #1714 Info) As most householders are probably aware, the evident Damp Patch - can become a Crack and a Trickle . . . before becoming a Flood !

Re:I would say yes, though very slowly (Score:0) by Anonymous User on 11:54 AM April 22nd, 2005 EST (#5) I sent emails to a bunch of NYT editors and staffers, and I although I haven't heard back from any of them, I got several auto responses from a few who were on vacation. So I know the emails are not getting filtered. Tom

[an error occurred while processing this directive]