How Did New York Times Promote Diversity?

Clay Shirky who wrote Newspapers and Thinking the Unthinkable (1993) argues that society doesn’t need newspapers society needs journalism to save society. Shirky supports this argument by giving a historical background to the problems newspapers face and how the problems have developed over time and the solutions society has came up with. The blogger concludes that in order for journalism to go farther new models must be created in place of past molds. Shirky directs this blog toward the current and future generations in attempt to motivate new models and methods of journalism.

Even though USA Today is a national newspaper, it is written in shorter piece and sprinkled with eye catching, colorful photos, graphs, and charts designed to address the needs of a sound-byte generation, which are never consider by any other media source and it makes the USA Today’s content refreshing and more engaging than other papers. Because of this the USA Today’s circulation grew rapidly from roughly 350,000 in 1982 to approximately 5.9 million daily print and online readers today. When comparing USA Today with other competitors like the Wall Street Journal, which has 2.12 million subscriptions and the New York Times, which has 1.58 million subscriptions, the USA Today remains the number one print newspaper and USAToday.com, is the internet’s top sites for news and

In the years leading up to 1971, America saw the rise of a new president, Richard Nixon elected in 1968, who would ultimately become one of the most infamous men in American history. This was coupled with the rising resistance against the Vietnam War, resistances like the Kent State shooting in 1970 and the 1967 march to the pentagon. Overall, this was a pivotal time in wartime America to keep moral high among citizen in order for the government to have the support to finish out the war in Vietnam. However, Nixon was soon faced with a leak inside the government that captivated the nation. In 1971, the Pentagon Papers were published in the New York Times. The Pentagon Papers were a classified study by the United States Government officially

Journalists are infamous for their motivation to produce hard hitting editorials, twisting the truth for their own selfish benefit. Steve Chapman strays away from this stereotype by ensuring integrity in every article. Continuously, Chapman strives to present the public with his analytical opinions. Douglas Adams describes the drive of Steve Chapman; “To give real service, you must add something which cannot be bought of measured with money, and that is sincerity and integrity”. Steven Chapman, who writes weekly op-eds for the Chicago Tribune, delivers insight into national headlines using suggestive rhetoric appeals to address the reader’s fears of uncertainty followed by accredited reasoning, a condescending tone targeted at the written subject, calling the reader for reformation within society, and dashes to separate general statements from definitive fact, shifting from a mission-based point of view to thought-provoking opinionated writing in order to spark motivation within his readers using his opinions so that they can take action to better their communities in hopes of improving future national development.

As the Vietnam War dragged on, with more than 500,000 U.S. troops in Vietnam by 1968, military analyst Daniel Ellsberg, came to oppose the war, and decided that the information contained in the Pentagon Papers should be available to the American public. He photocopied the report and in March 1971 gave the copy to The New York Times, which in return published the Pentagon Papers was the name given to a top-secret Department of Defense study of U.S. political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945 to 1967. The Nixon administration had Ellsberg indicted on criminal charges including conspiracy, espionage and stealing government property. The trial began in 1973, but ended in a dismissal of the charges after prosecutors discovered that a secret White House team burglarized Ellsberg’s psychiatrist’s office to find information that would discredit him.

The case New York Times Co. Vs United States in summary was a first amendment battle between the United States government and the prominent newspaper cooperation New York Times in 1971. The premises of this legal battle was based on the New York Times reporter Daniel Ellsberg publishing in excerpts illegally leaked, classified documents containing the United States involvement in the Vietnam War specifically on the anticipated death counts (Institution, 2015, p. n .p). However, The United States government finding out about leakage placed a prior restraint also known as “government action that prohibits speech or other expression before it can take place” on New York Times cooperation based on National Security grounds (Prior Restraint, 2015). The case, despite the over powering strength of the nation and the accusations against the New York Times Cooperation the case was ruled in favor of the New York Times by the Supreme Court (Curry, Riley, & Battistoni, 2015, p. 458).

The main question that probably arose was whether the president’s executive order surpassed the First Amendment. First, the District Court for the Southern District of New York judged the Times case and decided the government had not “show[ed] justification for the enforcement of such a [prior] restraint,” for it simply deemed the publication of the Pentagon Papers detrimental to the nation. Likewise, the District Court for the D.C. and the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit, the courts that judged the Washington Post case, came to the same verdict (New York Times Co. v. United States).

In the case that was know as The Pentagon Papers Case. The plaintiff; USA argued that “prior restraint was necessary to protect national security.” The defendant; NYT said that it wouldn’t hurt the people to know what was going on in a war that their own country was fighting in. The Pentagon Papers was a secret Department of Defense study of U.S. political and military involvement in Vietnam from 1945-1967. On June 30, 1971 the supreme court came to their decision. They voted 6 to 3 in favor of the New York Times. In writing for the

In the past, there has always been conflict between the free press and the government. This conflict was very evident in the Pentagon Papers case, also known as New York Times Co. v. United States. Historically, the Supreme Court has disagreed on the limitations that can be placed on the First Amendment. The Supreme Court faced these issues in the case of The New York Times. The newspaper obtained a copy of a Defense Department report that explained government deception in the Vietnam War. The Pentagon Papers emerged when the American people disagreed on the United States involvement in the war. Under the First Amendment, The New York Times argued

Americans across the country were either surprised at the news of this or it only confirmed people’s suspicions about the role the U.S. government had taken in the conflict (Pentagon Papers-Vietnam War). On the other hand, governments workers and the president himself were angered. Never in a million years had the President thought that a topic secret documents would somehow get leaked to the press. Nixon sought for revenge by calling for an injunction to stop all printing of the Pentagon papers. Upon the New York Time’s third installment of the Pentagon Papers, all the secrets that were held in the papers had ceased. Ellsberg, who was desperate to continue the spread of the Pentagon Papers, reached out to the Washington Post (Frankel). The Washington Post had accepted and as soon as their first installment was published, were soon in the same boat as the New York Times. The Washington Post and The New York Times, both thought that their injunctions were uncalled for so, they both appealed it and a court date was set for them. On June 23, 1971, hearings for both medias were held and the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals had voted 7 to 2 to deny an injunction against publication in the Washington Post, while the Second Circuit Court of Appeals had remanded the question of injunctive relief against the New York Times. The New York Times was allowed to appeal again, but this time, the case was taken to the Supreme Court. Luckily for the New York Times, they had won the case citing a violation of the First Amendment (Pentagon

The documents she published were ordered not to be published as they were from the same source as the New York Times’s information. After the lifelong competitors of two battling businesses, the Washington Post, and the New York times finally join forces and fight the court for their freedom and the freedom for the civilians who have rallied around the court

The concept that marriage can occur, endure, and succeed without the factor of love seems to be common in many other places in the world. “Who Needs Love! In Japan, Many Couples Don’t,” by Nicholas D. Kristof published in the New York Times in 1996 explores the aspects and success of loveless marriage in Japan beginning with Yuri Uemura of Omiya, Japan.

The United States as a whole is seen as the land of opportunity. New York is a major central for diversity and because of that many people from different cultural atmospheres have brought their families and dreams to New York City. Although Immigration patters throughout the last 200 years have varied, New York has consistently seen people from around the world move to the city and call it home. From the earliest points in our history as a nation, New York has been a center for trade and economic growth. New York is known world wide as a cultural melting pot. While other states have had immigration surges, none have compared to the diversity and sheer number of immigrants that have made their way to the City. This paper will focus on

This paragraph will criticize my thesis statement by presenting analysis and cases in which New Urbanism has achieved diversity physically and socially.

(USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, The New York Times, the Los Angeles Times, the