There are many reasons that are understandable, such as most media companies having to use multiple trackers to squeeze as much money out of their inventory as

There are many reasons that are understandable, such as most media companies having to use multiple trackers to squeeze as much money out of their inventory as possible (ad javascripts take most of the loading time). I think these are shitty but still understandable. But in this case, this is just a hipster website. The slow loading time is purely coming from the content. When NYT first did "Snowfall", people were trying to grasp onto anything that "might be the future of journalism", so that "rich format" took off for a while, but now people know better, these rich format articles have terrible ROI because creating them is really hard and not scalable, and in many cases it wastes a lot of traffic, and last and most importantly, readers couldn't care less about this "rich format" journalism. It's just the journalism people circle jerking about how "beautiful" it is. Which is why this format mostly disappeared. That said, I have never seen anything THIS bad. I am leaving all these comments here because I am genuinely annoyed that they messed up the reading experience on a topic I was actually interested in reading, so bad that I decided not to read it.