Ngl in my (previous, now) headcannon, you’re like a cyberhippie lady that lives on a farm with a bunch of butterfly lawn ornaments, host your own email server, and carry a shotgun with a big sun hat and a smile. Don’t ask me how my brain got there, I couldn’t tell you even if I tried.
They’re centrist to a fault and have a tendency to agree with the “official narrative” until it becomes unpopular. They’re so afraid of being seen as partisan any side can sway them by accusing them of being on the other side enough
imo a lot of their reporting is the best of the mainstream. lemmy users absolutely shit on the paper and they generally make valid points, but there’s a fair bit of “burn them at the stake” carry on. their op-eds tend to be “diverse”, meaning they have total pieces of shit spouting nonsense week by week.
This is an op-ed piece, and NYT op-eds have always been godawful. I don’t know why we care about it now, or why we’re only just now using it to criticize the NYTs journalism (which has more than enough to criticize all on it’s own) but that’s where this has come from.
Edit: Not entirely relevant to the first point, but I just went and gave it a listen and… The above piece is fucking embarassing. Really. That they’ve had to change the title three times would seem to indicate they agree. It’s the moderator (an absolute dickhead) and some conservative weirdo refusing to answer a very reasonable and simple question with just utter nonsense. Hopefully the justified backlash to this continues, and they eventually clue in and just take it down. Fucking joke.
You’re a hero listening to that I’d end up chucking my phone across the room. It’s funny NYT always seemed to have a good reputation shame it’s not deserved
Their journalistic reputation is quite deserved - despite many valid criticisms, they do still do incredibly good and important journalism. Their opinion pieces ride the coattails of that work to make them seem like they have any value. I honestly do not think I have ever seen a NYT opinion piece that’s not just absolute garbage.
The idea was to provide a counterpoint to the liberal ‘bias’ inherent to reporting all news - but that idea has long since stopped being reasonable, and it really needs to be just given up on.
Change your thinking immediately. Every single major news outlet in the US is pushing a corporation’s agenda. I promise. Theyre all owned by billionaires.
Even publicly funded news in the US helped usher in our current state of fascism by softballing it constantly to Americas lowest common denominator.
Which one of them opposed a single military action by the US as it was occurring?
You don’t get a platform if you’re not the type to hear “America just invaded/bombed <country>” and the first thing to come to mind is “Were any American soldiers hurt”.
However segments and whole shows on those channels are also often influenced heavily from outside donors. Unfortunately they still take corporate sponsorship.
I can’t think of a more NYT thing to publish. They’re practically a tabloid now.
I’m British so in my head they’re still classy. Where did it go wrong?
British? Interesting…
Ngl in my (previous, now) headcannon, you’re like a cyberhippie lady that lives on a farm with a bunch of butterfly lawn ornaments, host your own email server, and carry a shotgun with a big sun hat and a smile. Don’t ask me how my brain got there, I couldn’t tell you even if I tried.
That’s far more interesting than my life, so I’m going to say… yes, that is completely, totally accurate
They’re centrist to a fault and have a tendency to agree with the “official narrative” until it becomes unpopular. They’re so afraid of being seen as partisan any side can sway them by accusing them of being on the other side enough
imo a lot of their reporting is the best of the mainstream. lemmy users absolutely shit on the paper and they generally make valid points, but there’s a fair bit of “burn them at the stake” carry on. their op-eds tend to be “diverse”, meaning they have total pieces of shit spouting nonsense week by week.
This is an op-ed piece, and NYT op-eds have always been godawful. I don’t know why we care about it now, or why we’re only just now using it to criticize the NYTs journalism (which has more than enough to criticize all on it’s own) but that’s where this has come from.
Edit: Not entirely relevant to the first point, but I just went and gave it a listen and… The above piece is fucking embarassing. Really. That they’ve had to change the title three times would seem to indicate they agree. It’s the moderator (an absolute dickhead) and some conservative weirdo refusing to answer a very reasonable and simple question with just utter nonsense. Hopefully the justified backlash to this continues, and they eventually clue in and just take it down. Fucking joke.
You’re a hero listening to that I’d end up chucking my phone across the room. It’s funny NYT always seemed to have a good reputation shame it’s not deserved
Their journalistic reputation is quite deserved - despite many valid criticisms, they do still do incredibly good and important journalism. Their opinion pieces ride the coattails of that work to make them seem like they have any value. I honestly do not think I have ever seen a NYT opinion piece that’s not just absolute garbage.
The idea was to provide a counterpoint to the liberal ‘bias’ inherent to reporting all news - but that idea has long since stopped being reasonable, and it really needs to be just given up on.
When they were founded because the other big NY paper’s European correspondent¹ was not fascist enough.
They have been on the wrong side of history, like, every fucking time.
¹Karl something?
Change your thinking immediately. Every single major news outlet in the US is pushing a corporation’s agenda. I promise. Theyre all owned by billionaires.
Even publicly funded news in the US helped usher in our current state of fascism by softballing it constantly to Americas lowest common denominator.
There are exceptions which are not owned by billionaires, like the AP, NPR, and PBS.
Which one of them opposed a single military action by the US as it was occurring?
You don’t get a platform if you’re not the type to hear “America just invaded/bombed <country>” and the first thing to come to mind is “Were any American soldiers hurt”.
However segments and whole shows on those channels are also often influenced heavily from outside donors. Unfortunately they still take corporate sponsorship.
Democracy Now! is solid too