I will say; it’s nice they state who paid for it. That’s better than just the generic ‘sponsored’ label.

“How does greenwashing work? Let the NYT show you with direct, practical examples.”

I hear the arguments about “how sad, but they did note it is a paid piece” but this should absolutely be in the advertisement section, not a post with NYT heading.

Because now, this can be cited as “NYT said XYZ, see?” and because it’s presented like an article or opinion piece, it’s treated as such - disclosure or no. This is exactly the same astroturfing the oil and tobacco industries did with scientists and ‘research’ mills that churned out sympathetic studies for marketing to distort.

Disgusting to see “the paper or record” nakedly shilling - again.

Nothing the NYT publishes holds integrity. If they want to be paid by the oil industry, a genocidal country, you name it, fine, but don’t expect an increase in readers as younger generations become adults.

The NYT is a crypto-fascist rag. Corporate masters are putting their weight on the mainstream media to promote fascism beyond what even most liberals can put up with. They need to realize how much the rich want fascism yesterday. They cannot be won over anymore. They’ve made up their mind.

As someone who likes planes, trains and other forms of transport. It’s really hard to carry heavy batteries on planes, and until they make light batteries, that won’t change

Reuters has something like that too, called Reuters Plus. It’s less blatant, and isn’t pushed in with their proper content, but I find paid articles by purportedly quality outlets extremely questionable in anyway.

Neoliberalism.webp