‘You absolute ghouls’: New York Times readers bombard newspaper with threats to CANCEL $17-a-month subscriptions after it published latest hit-job on Queen days after her death

Advertisement
- Advertisement -


  • The New York Times received further backlash over reporting of the Queen’s funeral as it noted that it would be paid for by British taxpayers.
  • Readers denounced the tone of the reporting on social media just days after Queen Elizabeth’s death marked the end of her 70-year reign.
  • Many called the Times outrageous and said British taxpayers were more than happy to help pay for the cost of the Queen’s funeral
  • It is the latest in criticism by US media outlets against coverage of the Queen’s death and her upcoming funeral.

- Advertisement -

The New York Times faced another wave of backlash over its coverage of Queen Elizabeth’s funeral, with readers now threatening to unsubscribe from her $17-a-month subscription.

In its latest story on Wednesday, the Times reported that British taxpayers will put forward a bill for funeral costs, which will reportedly cost more than $6 million.

advertisement

The story drew a ‘heavy price tag’ amid rampant inflation in Britain, but readers were not interested in the article as it rejected the tone of reporting about the late monarch, 70 years old.

‘Your newspaper is unintentionally full of satire on a story that is not yours. Disappointing,’ wrote Twitter user Doreen Wilson.

- Advertisement -

‘I have subscribed for five years, but you have confirmed the wisdom of letting it go.’

The New York Times received further backlash over reporting of the Queen’s funeral as it noted that it would be paid for by British taxpayers.

Readers denounced the tone of the reporting on social media just days after Queen Elizabeth's death marked the end of her 70-year reign.

Readers denounced the tone of the reporting on social media just days after Queen Elizabeth’s death marked the end of her 70-year reign.

Wilson was not alone in criticizing the Times, with fellow Twitter user Robert Corbischle saying it would still cost taxpayers $7 less than the paper.

He wrote, ‘Per capita less than the cost of a copy of your ‘newspaper’.

Another Twitter user Tom Harwood noted that the British government was already paying billions of pounds to combat inflation.

‘Queen’s funeral’ [cost will] Be a fraction of a fraction of a fraction of that,’ Harwood wrote. ‘You absolute ghost.’

Another Twitter user with the handle Siamsi5 also condemned the Times, writing: ‘Show some respect to the woman who gave her life to the service’.

Another Twitter user Dave Bertie tweeted a sarcastic appreciation for the Times’ reporting: ‘Wow, incredible news, I imagined the Queen’s funeral would be paid for by US taxpayers.’

Twitter user Steve Chadwick echoed several online who said they are happy to help pay for the Queen’s funeral.

He wrote, ‘It’s been 70 years since the last one – I think we got it.’

The backlash came a week after the paper criticized an article by Maya Jasnoff, a history professor at Harvard University, where she focused on the history of Britain and the British Empire, saying it was wrong to ‘romanticize’ the crown.

“The Queen helped to obscure the bloody history of colonialism, the proportions and legacy of which have not yet been adequately acknowledged,” he wrote, adding that other journalists across the country criticized the late Queen’s reign. joined the suit for.

Many called The Times outrageous and said British taxpayers were more than happy to help pay for the cost of the Queen's funeral

Many called The Times outrageous and said British taxpayers were more than happy to help pay for the cost of the Queen’s funeral

The Times story was the latest in American articles about the Queen's death and funeral, which was criticized for the tone of the coverage.

The Times story was the latest in American articles about the Queen’s death and funeral, which was criticized for the tone of the coverage.

Maya Jasnoff, a Harvard professor specializing in the history of the British Empire, wrote for the Times last week that it was wrong to 'romanticise' the Queen's rule.

Maya Jasnoff, a Harvard professor specializing in the history of the British Empire, wrote for the Times last week that it was wrong to ‘romanticise’ the Queen’s rule.

New York Magazine’s The Cut has been seen as the biggest culprit on the Queen’s death and coverage of the British royal family.

Eclectic magazine, which published an in-depth interview with the Duchess of Sussex, Meghan Markle, in August recently targeted King Charles in a new piece that was published online on Wednesday.

The title of the latest story is: ‘The reign of riot of King Charles has begun,’ Which comes days before the Queen’s funeral, which is scheduled for Monday.

The article points to reports that Charles went through two ‘tantrums’ in the days following his mother’s death. There was a report that he was exiting a signing ceremony in Northern Ireland when a pen was leaked on him, another was when he was tailing and hissing at palace aides, who hurriedly moved the pen tray from his desk. failed to do. ,

King apparently gestured to the aides to help him make some space on a cluttered desk.

cut mentions a report Guardian In which it was alleged that Charles chose to tell about 100 staff that he was letting them go as he was preparing to go to Buckingham Palace during a memorial service for his mother.

A source told the newspaper, “Everyone including the private secretaries and the senior team is completely shocked.”

New York magazine's The Cut, which published an in-depth interview with Meghan Markle, has been seen as the biggest culprit over its coverage of the Queen's death.

New York magazine’s The Cut, which published an in-depth interview with Meghan Markle, has been seen as the biggest culprit over its coverage of the Queen’s death.

The article concludes by one of Meghan Markle’s many unsubstantiated allegations against Charles, that he was racist about his son Archie, and accuses him of ‘worldly cruelty’ to his wife, Princess Diana.

Notoriously, soon after the Queen’s death, The Cut published an article titled: ‘I will not cry over the death of a violent oppressor.’

The piece was an interview with Carnegie Mellon linguistics professor Uju Anya who tweeted on Thursday: ‘I heard the main king of a genocidal empire raping a thief is finally dying. May his pain be excruciating.’

Anya told The Cut that the queen was ‘representative of the cult of white womanhood’.

Uzu Anya, a black applied-linguistics professor at the University of Pittsburgh, said Friday: 'Queen Elizabeth was representative of the cult of white womanhood'

Uzu Anya, a black applied-linguistics professor at the University of Pittsburgh, said Friday: ‘Queen Elizabeth was representative of the cult of white womanhood’

Shortly before the Queen's passing was announced on Thursday, Anya tweeted that she expected her death to be 'excruciating'

Shortly before the Queen’s passing was announced on Thursday, Anya tweeted that she expected her death to be ‘excruciating’

Anya, an applied-linguistics professor at the University of Pittsburgh, is the daughter of a mother from Trinidad and a father from Nigeria.

He told NBC News that he is a ‘child of colonization’, and that his outlook is shaped by Britain’s role in the Nigerian Civil War.

“My earliest memories were of living in a war-torn area, and the reconstruction is still not complete,” he said.

He defended his remarks opposing the monarchy and said that the Queen was not exempted from decisions made by the British government ‘she looked after.’

Anya said, ‘Queen Elizabeth was the representative of the cult of white womanhood.

‘The notion that she was this little-old lady grandmother type, with her little hat and her purse and little dogs and everything, as if she lived in this place or this place imaginary, in this public image, who had ‘ He has no hand in the bloodshed of his crown.’

Credit: www.dailymail.co.uk /

- Advertisement -

Recent Articles

Related Stories