As someone who writes about the media, I spend a good portion of my workday consuming news — print products, websites, broadcast and cable television news, social media sites, public radio and even specialty shows on satellite radio.
The past few weeks have produced a dizzying amount and array of news, from the presidential debate that drove President Joe Biden from the race to the shooting at a rally held by former President Donald Trump, from Biden officially dropping out to Vice President Kamala Harris becoming the presumptive Democratic nominee.
When was the last time anything even approached this kind of news cycle? Maybe 2020, when COVID-19 essentially shut down the globe and Biden took on Trump to become president of the United States.
And each day, from the moment I get up to the time I go to bed and dozens of times in between, there are two websites that I constantly go to: The New York Times and The Washington Post. Not because I have to, but because I want to. It’s a habit born from the excellence of the journalism being done there.
The work turned in by these two iconic institutions over the past month has been nothing short of magnificent. Not only have the Times and Post expertly delved into the stories mentioned above, but they continue to produce extraordinary work on two wars, especially what’s going on in the Middle East; elections in France and Venezuela; and now the Olympics.
In addition, they continue to produce skillfully written and reported features on topics ranging from climate to summer books to movies to odd topics such as paper checks.
Take Sunday, as I’m writing this.
The New York Times website led with a story about how the “Gunman at Trump Rally Was Often a Step Ahead of the Secret Service.” And there was Shawn McCreesh’s piece: “From Believers to Bitcoin: 24 Hours in Trump’s Code-Switching Campaign.”
Other headlines included “A Village’s Anguish Over 12 Children Lost to a Rocket Strike,” as well as stories about Kamala Harris memes, who her running mate might be, and Trump’s running mate, JD Vance.
The Washington Post, meanwhile, wrote about “How Kamala Harris took control of the Democratic Party”; “Inside the powerful Peter Thiel network that anointed JD Vance,” and a fascinating story about Vance’s wife in “Usha Vance told friends Trump appalled her. Now she’s working to elect him.”
These stories aren’t just echoing one another. They are original, with in-depth reporting and hustle.
Has the coverage been perfect? Of course not. There are always going to be the occasional opinion pieces that seem based more on the personal politics of the author than reality, although that, too, is what makes places like the Times and Post so interesting — they offer a wide spectrum of voices.
What’s especially notable about the work from the Post is it’s being done while the paper is going through leadership changes and controversies involving its relatively new publisher. Even with a new executive editor and a great deal of uncertainty about its future from both a leadership and financial standpoint, the journalists at the Post continue to put out must-read work.
The stories I mentioned above are just a few of the stories at the top of their homepages. Keep scrolling for stories about pedicures, television, Melinda French Gates, and so much more.
It’s so easy to consume media and pick out the flaws. The Times and Post have given critics plenty to question in recent times.
But during one of the most newsworthy weeks in our nation’s history, the two newspapers considered to be the gold standard of American journalism have lived up to their reputations.
The quantity and, especially, the quality of their work has been what we’ve come to expect from the Times and Post.
But that doesn’t make it any less impressive.
On Friday night, X owner Elon Musk reposted a video of Vice President Kamala Harris saying negative things about President Joe Biden and even about herself.
One problem: The video was manipulated.
The Associated Press’ Ali Swenson wrote, “Two experts who specialize in AI-generated media reviewed the fake ad’s audio and confirmed that much of it was generated using AI technology. One of them, University of California, Berkeley, digital forensics expert Hany Farid, said the video shows the power of generative AI and deepfakes.”
In an email to Swenson, Farid said, “The AI-generated voice is very good. Even though most people won’t believe it is VP Harris’ voice, the video is that much more powerful when the words are in her voice.”
Is that true? While many, mostly because of its outrageous content, will see this as a fake, some might not.
The New York Times’ Ken Bensinger wrote, “The version posted on…
Read More: In praise of The New York Times and The Washington Post