NY Times Tried To Block The Internet Archive
from the why-the-internet-archive-is-invaluable dept
The Intercept has an interesting article that reveals another reason why some newspaper publishers are not great fans of the site:
The New York Times tried to block a web crawler that was affiliated with the famous Internet Archive, a project whose easy-to-use comparisons of article versions has sometimes led to embarrassment for the newspaper.
As the article explains, one of the important uses of the Internet Archive’s Wayback Machine is to compare Web pages as they are updated over time. It allows the differences between the original and later versions of a page to be identified. In particular, this feature can be used to spot changes in news stories that have been made without any accompanying editorial notes, so-called stealth edits. Here’s why that has been awkward for The New York Times:
The Times has, in the past, faced public criticisms over some of its stealth edits. In a notorious 2016 incident, the paper revised an article about then-Democratic presidential candidate Sen. Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., so drastically after publication — changing the tone from one of praise to skepticism — that it came in for a round of opprobrium from other outlets as well as the Times’s own public editor. The blogger who first noticed the revisions and set off the firestorm demonstrated the changes by using the Wayback Machine.
More recently, the Times stealth-edited an article that originally listed “death” as one of six ways “you can still cancel your federal student loan debt.” Following the edit, the “death” section title was changed to a more opaque heading of “debt won’t carry on.”
This is not something that serious newspapers should do. If they make changes, they should flag them up so that people can see what has changed. This is also an opportunity for them to justify changing the text. Stealth edits suggest that there was no good reason for changing things, other than trying to cover up a blunder or infelicity in the original version.
However much The New York Times – or any other newspaper or magazine – may dislike being shown up in this way, it is absolutely vital for the public to know when changes have been made. Without the Internet Archive or similar sites that preserve the original and updated copies of texts, the idea of a trustworthy text for an article no longer exists. This, in its turn, robs such articles of their historical value, since there is no way to guarantee that the text won’t change again, and without notice. The Internet Archive is not only providing a valuable service to the public by making any changes visible, it is actually helping newspapers by encouraging them to be honest and transparent about their changes. It would seem that The New York Times has a problem with that, which is a pity.
Follow me @glynmoody on Mastodon. Originally posted to WalledCulture, where it is noted that the site is funded in part by the Kahle/Austin Foundation, created by the Internet Archive’s Brewster Kahle.
Filed Under: archives, historical record, stealth edits, wayback machine
Companies: internet archive, ny times
Comments on “NY Times Tried To Block The Internet Archive”
'We here at the NY Times never make mistakes. Ever.'
Admitting when you make a mistake and going back to correct it is a sign of honesty and integrity.
Quietly changing what you got wrong and trying to prevent any record that you made a mistake in the first place however says much less flattering things of the one engaging in such behavior.
Re:
Yup, yup, yup. That hospital got blown up by <checks most recent version of article>…
Re: Re: That hospital got blown up by...
Terrorists.
I don’t know which card they pulled out of their pocket (izadin el qasam, al aqsa brigades, whatever came out the anus). They operate in the Gaza Strip and they are Hamas. Terrorists.
The NYT is showing a bad side of themselves by allowing censorship instead of transparency. It won’t change reality. It won’t change history. It will change where we put the NYT on the scale of absolutism in “trusted journalism no more.”
Re: Re: Re: terrorists
Aka: the Israeli government.
Never mind the hospital, they do a nice line in blatant genocide.
Of all the government’s in the world that one really should know better.
Re: Re: Re:2 Terrorists (not the Israeli government)
The Israeli government isn’t a terrorist regime, but thank you for trying to lump them in with the terrorists. They sure are retaliating against terror attacks (See e.g. Hamas October 7th), but that’s not genocide. You don’t get to go murder, rape, burn, pillage, and take civilian hostages and then cry to mama when you’re called out on it. That’s the difference between savage terrorist dogs, and the Israeli government.
The government’s what? I’m not sure what that the Israeli government owns that you think “one” should know better [of]. Perhaps you mean “because Israel is the constant target of terrorist attacks its government should know better than to respond?” No. “The government should know better than to protect its citizens… and when it fails, to attempt to ensure the terrorists savages cannot return?” Yes?
So confusing, my anonymous misinformed friend.
Re: Re: Re:3
Question: How many innocent Gazans/Palestinians have to die at the hands of the Israeli military for Hamas to be destroyed?
Re: Re: Re:4
What was the last population count? Two million or so?
Re: Re: Re:4
But if hamas is destroyed who will they have to oppress?
Re: Re: Re:3 What would "I" do?
Up until the 40s, Zionist were classed as terrorist. Menachem Begin was called a terrorist and a fascist by Albert Einstein and 27 other prominent Jewish intellectuals. Haven’t checked lately, but up until a few years ago, the UN has repeatedly cited the Israeli government for its war crimes; which continues up to today. The were converted to non-terrorist status because Truman needed favors the future Israeli government promised to help. Otherwise, they would still be labeled as a terrorist regime.
To understand Israeli government terrorism, research the USS Liberty where Israel murdered many US Navy Sailors, the Star of David Hotel (again, bokoo murder, even their own), Plan B, and many other Israeli greatest hits. The main difference between the 1940s and now is AIPAC/expert PR, propaganda, and a flock of fully cucked sycophants in DC. But not everyone is fully cucked. The scourge GHW Bush resisted them, but not the dumb one. And I love when Obama released TS intel that Iran was not a threat during the Iran Treaty negations, putting on full display the fantasies created by Israeli hyperventilation and hysterics.
https://www.nam.ac.uk/explore/conflict-Palestine
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionist_political_violence
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israel_lobby_in_the_United_States
https://www.opensecrets.org/industries/indus.php?ind=q05
Re: Re: Re:4 Whataboutism
Your whataboutism is impressive.
This is not a discussion of Menachem Begin in 1945. It’s a discussion about the NYT in 2023.
Do stop your queefing and get with the program.
Re: Re: Re:3
“The Israeli government isn’t a terrorist regime…”
Tell that to all the Palestinian children from the West Bank and Gaza Strip murdered by the Israeli army. I won’t say that the Israeli people are terrorists (any more than I would say that the American people are terrorists, for example), but they are definitely being led by a terrorist regime.
So confusing, my terrorist apologist misinformed friend.
Re: Re: Re:3
Called on it? Hamas? No, they are doing just fine, safely guarded inside their tunnels. Israel is only murdering civilians at the moment. They know this and don’t care. Yes, we heard the “Hamas is using meat shields so we don’t have a choice” argument all the time, but here is the thing: using civilians as meat shields is a war crime, but firing at the meat shields is a war crime too (see, dis-proportionality). If a bank robber is holding a hostage, and the police officer fires at them killing the hostage, is the police a hero here?
BTW, only a nutjob conspiracy theorist would believe the “failed Hamas missile” theory. Israel was bombarding the south nonstop (the same south they told civilians to evacuate to, BTW) but somehow this ONE missile was from Hamas, omegalol.
Re: 'We here at the NY Times never make mistakes. Ever.'
I asked the Ministry of Truth about the Internet Archive. They said no such thing has ever existed.
If only the Internet Archives could block the New York Times.
Re:
If only the Internet Archive could (or, rather, would) do something that destroys the entire reason for its existence. You know, if everybody thought like you, there’d be no need of legislation like the UK’s Online “Safety” Bill.
Soooo many adults acting like children these days.
This comment has been flagged by the community. Click here to show it.
Is this.....a somewhat conservative post?
Calling out the NYT on its revisionist bullshit? –cuz yes, they do this sorta thing quite a bit, famously just recently the Hamas terrorist->”gunmen”->then back again (after being shamed) headline, which I find it very suspicious you fail to mention.
Still, get me my fainting couch.
Re:
No, they are calling out why they want to block (at least one reason) the IA web crawler.
But yeah TD has called out stealth edits in the past IIRC.
A recent example
As to stealh edits by the NYTimes. We have a recent notorious example:
Israeli Strike Kills Hundreds in Hospital, Palestinians Say.
replaced with
At Least 500 Dead in Strike on Gaze Hospital, Palestinians Say.
and then with
At Least 500 Dead in Blast at Gaze Hospital, Palestinians Say.
All in the space of a few hours.
Now, since all of these are reports of a claim made by Palestinians (meaning Hamas in this instance), at one reading every headline was a true statement.
However, one must wonder about the editorial judgement of not merely reporting claims made by an organization that had mere days earlier carried out the deliberate mass-murder of Jews on a scale not seen since the Holocaust (and with the sort of glee at the murders for which even the SS rebuked the Croatian Ustashe running the Jasanovic death camp), but running with them as a headline on an event cloaked in the fog of war.
And then, trying to cover up the bad judgement by stealth edits (even as they repeated the bad judgement by using again in the headline the Hamas-supplied casualty figure of 500, seriously doubted by all Western intelligence services, who think the actual casualty count from the blast was 100 or less).
Re:
I too would greatly prefer to be murdered by efficient professionals rather than enthusiastic amateurs.
Re: Re:
I don’t know. Being paid may make the professionals quick and efficient rather than taking an inordinate amount of pleasure in killing you, but there are no guarantees.
Re: Hamas "infidel-splains"
Yes, women complain that men “mansplain” things to them thinking they are incapable of understanding… because they are women. Some of the examples are real, others are not, but certainly bear looking at.
Arab news sources (including PR people, spokesmen, etc.) think the rest of the non-Arab world (“infidels”) are stupid, so they just say what they like and think it will be accepted. One example is an accurate count of 500 dead within 5 minutes. Nobody can do that. They don’t care. They said it. Everyone should publish it.
In this case we have three things, one of which has YET TO BE ADDRESSED.
1. Hamas through out of its “shell corporation terrorist organizations” fired a missile that hit a hospital parking lot.
2. Israel was blamed, tho video footage and audio telephone recordings released –against Israli OPSEC rules– showed otherwise.
3. NYT and others (Al Jazeera, Reuters, AFP) blamed Israel. Al Jazeeer did a half walkback saying Israel’s missile interceptor hit the Hamas terrorism rocket. Still with no evidence.
When asked to show proof, Hamas said the evidence is all gone like “dissolved into the sea”. Amazing those modern munitions that disappear into nothing in the few hours before Hamas lets 3rd parties examine the scene.
What’s left is people and PR and Media questions as to “What did Israel do”… but the unasked question, and the infidel-splained question is “Hamas launched a missile that killed its own people. It lied about the source of that death, and the number of killed” and NOBODY QUESTIONED THIS. WHY?
Re: Re:
Here’s another question for you: why did the European colony get away with exterminating the native population?
Because the UN forgot to put an expiration date on their ‘One Free Genocide’ coupon
Re: Re:
Links required.
Re: Re: Re: You're not my mommy
They’re all here:
https://www.lmgtfy.com
FO.
E
Gee, it’s almost like having a random organisation operating in an unrelated industry perform an important regulatory function isn’t a great idea.
Back when the New York Times published the Pentagon Papers, the government saw that it had a problem. Don’t think for a second that the government didn’t solve that problem.
Don’t believe me – ask Judith Miller.
Re:
I smell BS. NYT publishes a lot of articles critical of the US Gov’t, such as the incredible one on the US’s drone strike on the aid worker and his many children as the US was withdrawing from Afghanistan.
A more charitable interpretation is that they wanted people to use their own paywalled archive instead of the free one the Internet Archive provides. However, without a full list of article revisions their archives are likely incomplete.