Media Screw-Ups: NYT BOWS to pressure, retracts Tom Cotton op-ed

Krystal and Saagar discuss the New York Times' response to Tom Cotton's op-ed posted by the publication.

About Rising: 
Rising is a weekday morning show with bipartisan hosts that breaks the mold of morning TV by taking viewers inside the halls of Washington power like never before. The show leans into the day's political cycle with cutting edge analysis from DC insiders who can predict what is going to happen. It also sets the day's political agenda by breaking exclusive news with a team of scoop-driven reporters and demanding answers during interviews with the country's most important political newsmakers. 

Follow Rising on social media:

Website: Hill.TV

Instagram: @HillTVLive

Twitter: @HillTVLive

Follow Saagar Enjeti & Krystal Ball on social media:

Twitter: @esaagar and @krystalball

Instagram: @esaagar and @krystalmball

[margaretames]

The NYTimes is nothing like what it once was. They are now clearly biased, not just on the opinion page.

[winstonwins]

If the staff cared so much they could have presented a counter argument. Run Tom Cotton's OPINION piece and run a counter argument piece next to it, or the next day. Though, I very much disagree with Cotton, I am uncomfortable with media removing opinions that represent a significant part of the population. Why not present a counter argument. Isn't that the real American thing to do?

[RuleofFive]

I wish you'd commented on the recent piece in the NYT trashing Tara Reid AGAIN. Things like: she didn't pay all her bills; she changed jobs a lot; she liked Putin? What nonsense. They did not seek her comment for the story either.

[markgibson]

I feel fortunate that both Krystal and Saagar are part of this show.

[mikecziraky]

Well New York Times can never claim to be non bias again

[michaelegan]

dude.. I love these guys. it's so refreshing to hear ppl with different views talk about issues with facts and be civil. I just had a conversation with a friend last night and it was awesome because even though we did not see eye to eye we had respect.

[ginabonelli]

There is no accountability for the people in power! The buck stops just below them.

[nikkireborn]

"Grey Lady Down"... It's sad. But every thing must end.

[charlesbeaudry]

NYT = Cowardly... Yep, that is exactly what we expect from NYT.

[SeaDrive]

How do you "retract" an Op-Ed, once you've published it? It doesn't make any sense!

[RextheRebel]

I hated what Tom Cotton said, he along the lines said that the way to silence an "insurrection" is with overwhelming force and a show of absolute strength. He sounded like The Emperor trying to teach his apprentice what makes a Sith Lord so frightening...

But, I don't know if I ahree that they should retract it. Because of them we now know this man's view and opinion. We need to know his opinion, it's relevant and necessary for us to be aware of what our politicians believe. We can't silence what we don't like because how are we supposed to know about these despicable people if they are unable to reveal themselves?

[hypernovie]

Rising is the only good thing on " The Hill" and they know it....They Block Commets on every thing else.

[pauldunecat]

That poll about sending in the troops also shows a majority was fine with burning down a police station. So don't confuse the trust the people have in the military with the absolute distrust of the police.

[bankgovperpwalks]

Free exchange of thoughts, opinions and ideas is not up to NY Times "standards".

[bassman]

Every once and a while a moment of truth accidently gets posted onto our editorial page. We humbly apologize....The NY Slimes

[stupidburp]

The NYT did not want to publish opposing views to this Op Ed that might point out systemic problems, including some about financial suffering amd wealth disparity and thus reacted by silencing the debate entirely.

[JustT]

A few days ago Krystal said the protesters were peaceful EVEN THOUGH THERE WAS A MILITARY PRESENCE. Do you think she understands the connection? Military presence = peaceful protests.
I do not believe she understands the connection, which is ASTOUNDING!

[johnstanton]

I guess I get it now. The First Amendment protects the paper when it refuses to post something that the left doesn't like, but allows the paper to remove a post if the left doesn't like it. Kind of like heads I win, tails you lose. Thanks for clarifying.

[aaron-n]

New info out on this shows the Times actually PITCHED the piece.

[hoapres]

New York Times new motto: All the news that is NOT fit to be printed.