[ad_1]
Scott Heins via Getty Images
Some people responded to the news with head-scratching, wondering how they had missed the rise of such a powerful force. A New York Times piece noted that media coverage of Ocasio-Cortez had largely been from websites “associated with millennial and female audiences.” In a sentence that has since been amended, the Times then contrasted those outlets with “national publications.”
“Before Tuesday’s victory catapulted her to the front of the political conversation, Ms. Ocasio-Cortez seemed to find readier audiences with outlets such as Elite Daily, Mic or Refinery29 — websites most often associated with millennial and female audiences — than with national publications,” the piece, titled “Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez: A 28-Year-Old Democratic Giant Slayer,” originally read.
In response to reader backlash, the Times changed the phrase “national publications” to “traditional publications.”
“The article stated incorrectly that Elite Daily, Mic and Refinery29 — popular among millennials and women — were not national outlets,” a correction note on the article reads. “They do, in fact, reach a national audience.”
The issue with the Times’ original wording is that it suggested “millennial and female audiences” are mutually exclusive from national ones. It also intimated that millennial and female audiences are not as significant or influential as others. Additionally, it ignored the elephant in the room: Millennials, aka people born between 1982 and 2000, number well over 80 million and represent more than one-quarter of the nation’s population.
Plus, the outlets the Times mentioned were clearly clued into a trend that many other publications seemed to miss.
Many people on social media took issue with the phrasing when the story first came out, suggesting that the publication needed to get, ahem, with the times.
https://t.co/9EjYhKDYs5
Kind of pisses me off that @nytimes is still asking Who Is Ocasio-Cortez? when it should have covered her campaign. Missing her rise akin to not seeing Trump’s win coming in 2016.— Jill Abramson (@JillAbramson) June 27, 2018
That we’re still referring to certain media outlets as “women’s media” in the year of our lord 2018 is truly incredible, @nytimes really finding new ways to bungle things every single day.
— Tyler McCall (@eiffeltyler) June 27, 2018
“Female” and “millennial” audiences…so, all women aged about 20 to about 40…are in direct juxtaposition to what’s relevant to a “national publication.”
The implication here is troubling to say the least. https://t.co/gEeMzZP96X
— Summer Brennan (@summerbrennan) June 27, 2018
Imagine being this disconnected.
R29, Elite Daily and Mic ARE national publications. Maybe the Times should learn something from us.
They didn’t bother to profile @Ocasio2018’s campaign once because they wrote her off as nosy Brown girl with impossible dreams. We knew better. pic.twitter.com/v9s612KyMe
— Andrea González-Ramírez (@andreagonram) June 27, 2018
HI YES I WOULD LIKE TO COSIGN THIS WHOLE THREAD FROM ANDREA.
Elite Daily, Mic, and R29 versus “national publications”? Tbh I’m not even surprised NYT is pulling this crap. They’re pissy that they’re getting called on their shit. https://t.co/dkwuPewJ6i
— Lily Herman (@lkherman) June 27, 2018
Been seeing lots of comments like this from/about bigger media outlets. I had her profiled at Elite Daily and she also got profiles in R29 and Vogue. Maybe it’s time for the big boys to take women and millennials more seriously https://t.co/1lx6ta7cyN
— Alexandra Svokos (@asvokos) June 27, 2018
[ad_2]
Source link