Does the New York Times bury a story? And if so, why?
The New York Times could also bury a story if there are legal concerns or uncertainties around it. They don't want to be in a position where they might be sued or face legal consequences for reporting something that isn't fully verified. So, they may hold off on giving it a prominent position until they have more information.
Well, it might be a perception that the New York Times buries a story. Sometimes the way their layout works, or how their digital platforms display content, can give that impression. But it could also be that the story doesn't fit the current narrative or angle they are focusing on in their overall reporting. For instance, if they are running a series on environmental issues, a story about a minor business deal in a different industry might not get top billing.
Why does an investor drop The New York Times after a story?
Maybe the story contains some information that makes the investor lose confidence in The New York Times. For example, if it reveals some unethical business practices within the company related to its financial management or editorial integrity. This could lead the investor to believe that the company's future prospects are not good and thus decide to drop it.
Why does the New York Times publish old stories?
They may also publish old stories to celebrate anniversaries. For instance, if a significant event happened 50 years ago, they could republish the story to mark the occasion and let the new generation know about it.
Why does fiction trump truth in the New York Times?
Fiction often offers escapism and imagination that can be more engaging than straightforward truth. It allows for creative expression and can touch hearts in ways raw facts might not.
Why does the New York Times recommend 6 x 9 for novels as mentioned in 'new york times recommends 6 x 9 for novels'?
Maybe it's a standard size that is cost - effective for printing and binding.
Why is the 'New York Times Australian Story' important?
It's important because it gives an international perspective on Australia. The New York Times has a wide readership globally, so it can introduce Australia to a large number of people who may not be very familiar with the country.
Why did New York Times withdraw the story?
Another possibility is that there were legal issues. For example, if the story was likely to lead to a lawsuit due to defamation or invasion of privacy, the New York Times might choose to withdraw it. In some cases, internal editorial reviews might also reveal flaws in the story's structure, argument, or ethical implications, forcing the withdrawal.
Why did New York Times withdraw the story?
There could be several reasons. Maybe they found inaccuracies in their reporting. For example, if the sources turned out to be unreliable or if there were errors in the facts presented.
Why did the New York Times retract a story?
Another possibility is that there were legal issues associated with the story. Perhaps it contained information that violated someone's privacy or was defamatory. In such cases, rather than facing potential legal consequences, they choose to retract the story.
Why would the New York Times change a story?
There are several reasons. New sources could have come forward with different information. Or perhaps they made an error in the initial reporting. The New York Times has a reputation to uphold for accuracy, so if they realize there was a mistake, they will change the story. Also, the situation on the ground might have changed. Say they were reporting on a conflict, and there has been a significant shift in the situation, like a cease - fire or a new alliance, they would have to change the story to keep it up - to - date.
Why does the New York Times keep publishing old stories?
Maybe they think those old stories still have value. Some old stories might be relevant to current events in a different context, or they could be part of a series that they want to continue to promote.