Want to understand the fundamental difference between the New York Times and the New York Post? Ignore the political differences, ignore the quality of the coverage, ignore the headlines, ignore the level of discourse. You can even ignore “columnist of the year” Andrea Peyser. In the end, it all comes down to the Popsicle.
Well, make that the Snapsicle. Yesterday, in an attempt to break the Guinness record for “The World’s Largest Popsicle,” Snapple brought a 17.5 ton Snapple Popsicle to New York’s Union Square. The kiwi-strawberry flavored Snapsicle (as the Times dubbed it) had been brought in from Edison, New Jersey, in a freezer truck, and though it had been prepared at minus 20 degrees Fahrenheit, it apparently got mushy along the way; by the time it made it to Union Square on the first day of summer, the melting had begun. Soon pink liquid was pouring down 17th Street, and the police and fire departments were summoned to control the damage.
The Times and the Post took very different tacks in their stories on the unfortunate Snapfu. (Sorry, we couldn’t help ourselves.) Bemused, the former saw humor in the situation; alarmed and indignant, the latter treated Union Square like a kiwi-strawberry war zone. Consider this passage from the Post story: “One woman who fell in the hazardous goo was rushed to the hospital with a badly sprained ankle, and three cyclists … were catapulted off their bikes.” Hazardous goo! Cyclists catapulted! Not to worry, though: The Post informs us that “[t]he Fire Department raced … to hose down the super-slick road menace.” Well, thank goodness someone hosed down the super-slick road menace.
The Times, on the other hand, was nothing if not amused. The fun began with the headline: “A Shocking Thing Happened to the Big Popsicle. It Melted.” And Anthony Ramirez’ story kept the comedy coming: “Alas, like James Arness in the 1951 alien thriller ‘The Thing From Another World,’ the giant Snapsicle began to melt. Soon pedestrians were fleeing in not-quite terror…” He closes with a mention of the reigning, and still not dethroned, giant Popsicle record holders, one Jan van den Berg and his Dutch friends, as well as a deadpan question for a Snapple official: “Will Snapple get off the mat and try once again, maybe in August?” (Incidentally, the answer was “probably not.”)
The Times doesn’t always strike the same tone, of course, but on a story like this you know what to expect — a piece that tacitly acknowledges the occasional absurdity of New York life. The Post, on the other hand, traffics in broad strokes and easily identifiable heroes and villains. The tabloid cast Snapple as a villain, and focused on the beverage company’s victims, while the Times was more interested in the anatomy of the debacle.
Which leads us to suspect that perhaps the fundamental difference between the papers is political; after all, the rap on Republicans is that they traffic in stories to manipulate emotions, and the rap on Democrats is that they get so wrapped up in process that they miss the big picture.
Either way, this summer is sure to produce more examples of the Times and Post taking different approaches to the various bizarre stories that inevitably come with hot weather in the city — and give us insight into the essence of the two papers.
Rest assured, we’re on the case. And secretly hoping for something else Popsicle-related.
–Brian Montopoli
Brian Montopoli is a writer at CJR Daily.