Posted on 09/20/2025 12:13:12 PM PDT by nickcarraway
We gathered some of the journalists closely involved to discuss how we approached coverage and to answer readers’ questions about it
Charlie Kirk was shot at a college in Utah, and New York Times journalists began grappling with a series of questions and decisions. What happened? Were graphic videos of his injuries real? Which facts could we confirm without reporters on the scene yet?At 3:01 p.m., we published confirmation of the shooting, and a new round of judgment calls began: Would we show clips of Kirk’s shooting? What words and shorthand would we use for him in headlines — a “right-wing provocateur,” a “conservative activist” or something else?
What parts of his ideology — popular on the right, loathed on the left — would we include in coverage?About 90 minutes later, the Times reporter Robert Draper confirmed Kirk’s death with his spokesperson, and our homepage changed to a banner headline with a new verb: “assassinated.”Over the next six days, we published more than 100 pieces about Kirk. That’s a lot for someone many Americans did not know. But this was not only a story about one man being murdered, it was a story about political violence, a polarized society, free speech, the president and a cascade of consequences, from growing fury on the right to, most recently, the suspension of a late-night TV comedian for his comments about Kirk.
It is also a story that has drawn intense interest from readers. The day of the shooting, searches related to Kirk’s death eclipsed any other news topic this year, according to Google. Our audience was double what we would typically see on a Wednesday in September, and much bigger even than for other huge news events, like when Pope Francis died or when Donald J. Trump was shot while campaigning for president.Since
(Excerpt) Read more at nytimes.com ...
I think we should investigate who really killed Charlie Kirk.
Isn't that called 'setting the narrative'?
/rhetorical question
He was turning the youth vote red. Let’s see, what power organization wouldn’t like that?
How about this headline? “Arizona father of two girls, assasinated by gay terrorist?” Factual, accurate and not provacative.
Were Charlie an illegal alien with a long felony record shot by ICE during his commission of a crime, the NYT would dance around all the facts.
Holodomor didn’t happen with them.
F the NYT.
L
Right before he was assassinated, Charlie Kirk was starting to question the fake Jews running the government of Israel.
I believe its daughter and son.
Let them investigate the NYT. I sure as hell won’t.
“F the NYT’’.
Knowing those freaks they’d probably like that.
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.