The same NYT whose profit shrank by 95,7% in the last quarter because of the extremely biased reporting? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3897406/New-Yo

The same NYT whose profit shrank by 95,7% in the last quarter because of the extremely biased reporting? http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3897406/New-York-Times-reports-95-7-percent-fall-quarterly-profit.html http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3897406/New-York-Tim... And the exactly same numbers by Reuters but with completely misleading headline as if everything was fine: http://www.reuters.com/article/us-newyorktimes-results-idUSKBN12X1HU http://www.reuters.com/article/us-newyorktimes-results-idUSK... Funny how the NYT now makes about as much profit as I do as a contractor. Maybe I should buy them and put their journalists to more profitable use, like for example letting them clean toilets or work the streets. Edit: Why the downvotes? Does somebody dispute the fact that the NYT's profits are down by 95,7%? Or would somebody dispute that this company wouldn't be making more profit if it sent its employees to clean toilets or sell their bodies? I believe I made here a sensible business case for saving the NYT.