Posted on

At the New York Times, Meritocracy Dies in a Dimly Lit Corner Booth at Mar-a-Lago

The New York Times landed an unmediated, unplanned interview with President Donald Trump last week, and used the rare opportunity to redefine “landed” as “blew.”

The interview did generate some news, when “news” is defined as unimportant, predictable opinion and speculation rather than substantive, factual information. The Times was widely criticized for the lack of pushback in the follow-up questions, but data analysis by The Fucking News reveals that the real problem was in the first-up questions, which were largely about jack-shit, who-gives-a-shit, and fuck all.

To info-splain the data behind the interview, the TFN Interactives/Emojis Team created the following interactive listicle data-gif-storm, turning the numbers underlying the Q&A into a graphic representation of symbols indicating phonetic sounds that comprise words. We call it Carper’s Index.

Carper’s Index of the NY Times Trump Interview

Number of questions about Trump’s beliefs about when the DOJ investigation might be resolved: 3
Number of follow-up questions regarding Trump’s feelings about his beliefs about when the DOJ investigation might be resolved: 2
Number of actual informations Trump possesses about when the DOJ investigation might be resolved: 0
Number of questions about the comparative loyalties of Eric Holder and Jeff Sessions: 1
Number of children no longer covered by the Children’s Health Insurance Program: 9,000,000
Number of children no longer covered by the Children’s Health Insurance Program who were not asked about: 9,000,000
Number of requests to explain the Democrats on the tax bill: 1
Number of requests to explain the Republicans on the tax bill: 0
Number of requests to explain the tax bill: 0
Number of interruptions to affirm the niceness of Sen. Joe Manchin (D-WV): 1
Number of interruptions to affirm Trump’s popularity in West Virginia: 1
Number of interruptions to affirm facts contrary to Trump’s statements: 0
Number of interruptions to challenge Trump by asking him, “And you think you can do it?”: 1
Number of questions regarding Trump’s opinions about the Alabama special election for Senate: 4
Number of questions regarding Trump’s opinion about various matters related to the Alabama special election for Senate that relate to the hypothetical bigness of a hypothetical Luther Strange victory: 1
Number of questions regarding how much money Trump is willing to spend on public infrastructure: 1
Number of questions regarding how much of that money will subsidize private ownership of public infrastructure: 0
Number of observations that Trump is moving to the center: 1
Number of times Trump corrects that observation: 1
Number of times Trump’s correction is met with the observation that he is not moving: 1
Number of times Trump corrects the observation that he is not moving by saying, “I’m always moving”: 1
Number of directions in which Trump says he is moving: 2
Number of times Trump is asked what direction he’s moving in to restore power in Puerto Rico: 0
Percentage of households in Puerto Rico estimated to be without electrical power: 45
Percentage of households in Puerto Rico estimated to be without political power: 108
Number of questions that begin with “Do you think I’m wrong…”: 1
Number of questions that begin with “Do you think I’m wrong…” and end with bullshit hypothesis that in 2018 Trump will be a “a real deal maker,” whatever the fuck that fucking means: 1
Number of clarifications of whatever the fuck that fucking means: 0
Number of answers to questions that begin with “Do you think I’m wrong…” that amount to “Yes.”: 1
Number of times Trump’s remarks are responded to with the word, “Yeah”: 4
Number of times the word “Yeah” came in response to Trump asking whether he makes sense: 1.

The Times defended the interview by explaining that it was impromptu, forcing the interviewer to rely solely on his knowledge of and interest in horseshit.

(Ed. Note: The original headline for this article was “Something Something Access of Evil” but we never really made it work. The current headline was originally factually correct regarding the location of the interview but was altered because “dimly lit corner booth” makes us laugh.)

more: NY Times