User Score
7.3

Generally favorable reviews- based on 9 Ratings

User score distribution:
  1. Positive: 8 out of 9
  2. Mixed: 0 out of 9
  3. Negative: 1 out of 9

Review this movie

  1. Your Score
    0 out of 10
    Rate this:
    • 10
    • 9
    • 8
    • 7
    • 6
    • 5
    • 4
    • 3
    • 2
    • 1
    • 0
    • 0
  1. Submit
  2. Check Spelling
  1. Jun 26, 2011
    7
    A good, exciting movie which could have gone further. Not a hint about the alleged ideological bias which many believe is on display in the news section of the Gray Lady. It discussed Blair & Miller, but not quite enough about how the top level editors decide what makes A1. But I enjoyed it despite these issues.
  2. Jul 3, 2011
    10
    We enjoyed this insight into print journalism although we though it did not go into great depth. We had seen David Carr on Real Time with Bill Maher the week before which made us interested in the film. The film did not not toot the NY Times horn to much excess and gave us some insight into how a paper operates in today's recessionary world. Beat going to see "Transformers".
  3. Jun 22, 2011
    8
    Excellent documentary about the attempts of the New York Times to keep its moral, professional, and financial balance in a time of declining ad revenue, the death of other big-city newspapers, alternative news presentation sources, reporter error(Judy Miller), journalistic fraud (Jayson Blair) and questionable partnerships (Wikileaks). On the whole, the documentary was credible andExcellent documentary about the attempts of the New York Times to keep its moral, professional, and financial balance in a time of declining ad revenue, the death of other big-city newspapers, alternative news presentation sources, reporter error(Judy Miller), journalistic fraud (Jayson Blair) and questionable partnerships (Wikileaks). On the whole, the documentary was credible and thought-provoking. It's true that David Carr, the featured NYT reporter, was a larger than life figure and that the rationale for using the Wikileaks material was a bit hard to accept, but there were many, many memorable moments: the look on an aggregator's face as Carr showed him what percentage of his "publication" would remain if his traditional media sources were removed; the confrontation between a new Tribune publisher and Tribune staff; the interaction among section editors as page one space was allocated. I am not a regular reader of the New York Times, but this documentary reminded me that there IS a critical mediating function to be carried out by high-quality investigative journalism. I hope the NYT finds it way and is still investigating and publishing--in some form--at the beginning of the 22nd century. Highly recommended. Expand
  4. Aug 10, 2012
    6
    An intriguing documentary on an incredibly timely topic, however its depressive nature combined with a lack of solutions presented make this little more than a revelation of something most already know.
Metascore
68

Generally favorable reviews - based on 31 Critics

Critic score distribution:
  1. Positive: 24 out of 31
  2. Negative: 2 out of 31
  1. Reviewed by: David Parkinson
    Sep 19, 2011
    60
    Ironically, it lacks journalistic rigour but it's a fond, nostalgic look at the gilded history of the Grey Lady.
  2. 63
    Alas, the filmmaker, maybe because he had to account for every week of his more than year-long visit to the Times, has crowded his film with too many subplots and way, way too many cameos of all the usual suspects, wringing their hands over what will become of newspapers.
  3. Reviewed by: Rene Rodriguez
    Jul 7, 2011
    75
    The movie is slick and entertaining, but much of it is as superficial as a Twitter post.