The NYT were enthusiastic supporters of Fidel Castro, who was a communist. He visited their offices in person, mentioning that he couldn't have gotten into powe

The NYT were enthusiastic supporters of Fidel Castro, who was a communist. He visited their offices in person, mentioning that he couldn't have gotten into power without them. It could be that there is systematic bias at the NYT opposing democracy, except as a rhetorical technique to appeal to its readers. Castro's chief executioner had this to say: A foreign reporter -- preferably American -- was much more valuable to us at that time (1957) than any military victory. Much more valuable than rural recruits for our guerrilla force, were American media recruits to export our propaganda. They didn't seem to like Hugo Chavez(mentioned in the article, and a socialist) at the time, which is evidence against it being a general trend. I'd need to look at other leaders to see if it is systematic from the NYT. Maybe Hugo just wasn't as good at dealing with the media: http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/venezuela/chavez2.htm http://www.latinamericanstudies.org/venezuela/chavez2.htm There could be bias from this specific author, though. If this author was going to write any article at all, it was going to be about Trump destroying Democracy. The same author used to work at Vox and there are many other articles comparing him to a dictator: http://www.vox.com/authors/amanda-taub http://www.vox.com/authors/amanda-taub How much independence are NYT writers given? Does the company take a stance on certain issues? Is there selection bias for certain employees, even if there's no explicit company policy on politics? This could be measured to some extent by checking political donations from employees associated with the NYT. I think that data is public. None of these necessarily oppose their argument, but good evidence and arguments subjected to enough selection bias can say any story you want it to. http://lesswrong.com/lw/js/the_bottom_line/ http://lesswrong.com/lw/js/the_bottom_line/ Does the difference correlate well with immigration patterns? A lot of the European countries are admitting many refugees and migrants from countries with a lot of corruption. The US might have many migrants from Mexico or other Central or South American countries with a higher corruption index. It could be that the migrants don't care about democracies, because they weren't raised in a culture that cares about democracies. I'm 27 and prefer a Republic to a Democracy, since it keeps more power closer to the people governed. I haven't looked at their study to see if I would count as a younger person opposed to Democracy. Sanders is a socialist and he seems to be pretty popular. It could be that people are warming up to socialism or communism. That's different from the system of government, but depending on how they did the study they could've said that socialists are not in favor of democracies.