• @ceenote@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    107
    edit-2
    1 year ago

    I know how editorial sections work, but you’d think they’d at least check for bald-faced lies. Not out of a sense of decency, but self-interest.

    • mozz
      link
      fedilink
      561 year ago

      I see you’re not familiar with our media

        • @ChicoSuave@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          491 year ago

          It did but then Meredith Levien took control of the business and added a hard authoritarian edge to the paper which is showing in all the right wing religious nonsense it has been spewing of late.

        • @alcoholicorn@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          31
          edit-2
          1 year ago

          It’s fitting that the liberal paper of record supported every single war the US has been in, opposed MLK when he was marching, promoted the whole “crack babies pre-disposed to crime” horseshit in the 90s, but evolved to take the correct side that <insert war> was bad, MLK was good (but civil rights is over, these new guys need to shut up), etc 5 years after it mattered.

        • @TOModera@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          231 year ago

          I mean, they hired a Hitler sympathizer in the 1930s who praised Goebbels, so one could argue they have always been shitty. I’d say it’s time to start telling people they (NYT) are shit and hope they lose money.

        • @Freefall@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          121 year ago

          Pretty sure someone did a deep digging of info and every news outlet of consequence is at least headed by a gop donor.

          Not equating correlation with causation here…let’s just say “I’m just asking questions!”

    • I don’t know if the tweet is wrong or did NYT change the title but it’s now called “Why I won’t vote”. I don’t know what it contains because I’m not clicking on it to give that dickhead clicks.