(2020-02-02) Dean Baquet Interview Demonstrates Why Bothsidesism Is Alive And Well At His New York Times

Dan Froomkin: Dean Baquet interview demonstrates why bothsidesism is alive and well at his New York Times. Talking to Michael Barbaro on the Times’s “The Daily” podcast... I transcribed a fair amount of the podcast for those of you who don’t have that kind of time.

But the problem, as I describe in my article "Political journalists are doing voter interviews all wrong", is not that Times reporters talk to these people, it’s that they ask stupid questions that aren’t remotely revelatory; the articles all say pretty much the same thing; and they often elide obvious motives like racism.

Dean Baquet: There was a big debate in our newsroom and outside our newsroom about whether the New York Times should use the word racist. And I accept disagreement. My view is the most powerful writing lets the person talk, lets the person say what he has to say, and it is usually so evident that what the person has to say is racist or anti-Semitic that to actually get in the way and say it yourself is less powerful.

The interview was ostensibly about “The Lessons of 2016.” Baquet said the Times failed to see what was going on out in the country, and won’t make that mistake again. But he didn’t cop to overcovering Hillary Clinton’s scandals, or undercovering Trump’s.