The report aspires to the NYT becoming an "authoritative, clarifying and vital destination". I'd like that. But it's not clear to me that they realize how bad

The report aspires to the NYT becoming an "authoritative, clarifying and vital destination". I'd like that. But it's not clear to me that they realize how badly they are currently failing at it. Over the holidays, the PBS Newshour did a "free energy from water!" story. Really. And then apologized, saying they would review their news process. But even then, it wasn't clear to me they realized just how brainlessly they had f*ed up. The NYT usually manages to avoid such. And to spell names right. But on topics I know about, NYT coverage often/usually manages to miss the point. (And yet I keep going back, implicitly assuming their coverage of other topics, that I know less about, is somehow less bad. Somebody-or-other's fallacy.) There are more ways to "get it badly wrong", than to merely fail fact-checking. And then there's the old concept of news. Report the trivia of what happened yesterday, and if you're lucky, use it as a "hook" to squeeze in an inch or two aimed at providing context and understanding. From scratch each time, because you can't count on any one reader having previously encountered it. Authoritative? Clarifying? Well, they manage to be less bad at these than many other venues. But that's a very low bar. The report says "We have developed one of the most civil and successful comment sections in the news business". Talk about low bars. "but we still don’t do nearly enough to allow our readers to have these interactions." Interactions... not say, opportunity to lend us a clue. I was wondering over the holidays whether to get a NYT subscription. And then hit another article that was "well, sort of..., but no" getting it wrong, and gave up. News coverage, from every venue I know about, is just startlingly bad. Which makes "committed to holding powerful people and institutions accountable" a nice idea, but largely unimplemented. NYT search... "groupthink trump": 17 hits (hmm, I expected more). "groupthink tpp": 0. ""regulatory capture"": 2 hits in all of 2016. Sigh.