The NYTs equivocation and wishy washy reporting and opinion pieces (often strident and false) have become increasingly irksome. The longer it goes on, the more it looks like they support and understand that another Trump presidency is inevitable, that the slaughter and starvation of Palestinians is necessary and just, and that Putin can have Ukraine, because, who cares.
The cognitive disconnect necessary to maintain those positions day after day is deliberate, continual editorial decisions are being made.
There's no moral framework, let alone journalistic integrity.
They need a "respectable" alternative to the Democrats to maintain their horserace coverage, so it generates discussion and engagement and clicks. It's all about ad revenue.
The NYTs equivocation and wishy washy reporting and opinion pieces (often strident and false) have become increasingly irksome. The longer it goes on, the more it looks like they support and understand that another Trump presidency is inevitable, that the slaughter and starvation of Palestinians is necessary and just, and that Putin can have Ukraine, because, who cares.
The cognitive disconnect necessary to maintain those positions day after day is deliberate, continual editorial decisions are being made.
There's no moral framework, let alone journalistic integrity.
They need a "respectable" alternative to the Democrats to maintain their horserace coverage, so it generates discussion and engagement and clicks. It's all about ad revenue.
Ad revenue is both an asinine and vacuous excuse. Morally bankrupt.