Posted on 02/20/2022 6:11:11 AM PST by Rummyfan
It looks like the New York Times is at it again. In recent years, America’s least-reliable news source has developed a strange view of Britain — or at least since the Brexit vote in 2016. In the NYT’s world, the UK is a desolate place, where locals huddle round trash can fires on the streets of London, gnawing on legs of mutton and cavorting in swamps during the summer, ever fearful of the despot prime minister, Boris Johnson. Just last month the paper’s international edition ran a front-page comment piece claiming the country would “sleepwalk into tyranny” thanks to our “ever more spiteful nationalism.'”
Now though it seems the Brit-bashing has a new outlet: attacking the UK’s greatest living writer. In their rush to identify themselves with fashionable elite opinion, the New York Times has decided to take aim at J.K. Rowling, persona non grata in the woketariat for her comments about sex and gender. The paper has launched a new achingly right-on advertising campaign, ostensibly based around one of its subscribers and their passions.
A new YouTube ad introduces us to ‘Lianna’, who, we are told, has subscribed to the NYT since 2020 and is described as a “harmony of flavors.” We are introduced to her various passions for articles on themes such as “a week in crossword land” and “queer love in color” before another suggested newspaper title flashes up: “Imagining Harry Potter without its creator.” It’s the only implicit reference in the thirty-second clip to any notable individual and is clearly something of a deliberate swipe at She Who Must Not Be Named, the outspoken author whose critics have indeed tried to erase her works.
(Excerpt) Read more at spectatorworld.com ...
mmm . . . mutton.
That be a dude.
How about the Epoch Times?
Apparently “Lianna” is an overfed, bespectacled tree frog.
Tell me again why her(?) opinion matters?
Frankly I wish we would go back to running queers out of town. No good can come from the acceptance of sodomites.
Looks like Elie Mystal before the perm.
Black trannies are definitely the best people to take advice and input from.
Gosh...I’d hate to read this creature’s comments on Hans Christian Andersen.
That NYT ad is clearly aimed at a post-literate/sub-literate audience and made for people whose attention span is challenged by TikTok videos.
“Lianna” be fat and ugly......
“...attacking the UK’s greatest living writer.”
Well, perhaps greatest living author in terms of SALES. But I posit that Ken Follett is a superior writer and storyteller (and, yes, he is still living).
I would disagree.
As a writer myself with a few works under my belt, there is a certain category of authors that leave me in awe. The Tolkiens, Herberts, Asimovs, and Rowlings do something that’s impossible for me — create whole worlds out of nothing. My writing has to be anchored in a real world, but these storytellers are special. I can’t comprehend the complexity of creating a world from whole cloth, and keeping track of the cultures, terms, idiosyncrasies, and motivations of an imaginary space. Their talents are truly incredible and place them on a plain all their own.
Couldn’t care less about the commies eating the woke. You go NYT. Put it out there for all to see.
The NYT, like CNN, is becoming irrelevant in today’s society.
Yet, it is entertaining when we get to witness progressives eating their own.
The key word in that sentence is “living.” Learn to read and comprehend.
The New York Times is becoming a parody of itself. Harry Potter with out Rowlings is about 10,000 scrabble games dumped on a floor, or books by IKEA. This isn’t hard to figure out.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.