3 ms·
> If an article appears under the New York Times' logo and URL, then it can reasonably be assumed to reflect an opinion that the New York Times wishes to be ass
by ucaetano 9y ago
> If an article appears under the New York Times' logo and URL, then it can reasonably be assumed to reflect an opinion that the New York Times wishes to be associated with.
No. That is not a reasonable assumption. Newspapers frequently carry highly opposing pieces in their opinion sections. That's how newspapers have worked for a very long time:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op-ed https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Op-ed
The NYT has, for example, hosted Putin in the opinion section:
http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-caution-from-russia-on-syria.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/09/12/opinion/putin-plea-for-cau...
- CamperBob2 9y agoNo, all that shows is that they're not concerned with who provides the opinion piece. (And they shouldn't be.) It doesn't make any sense to publish something under your name and then complain when people think you're endorsing it. If I paste a pro-Nazi editorial into my blog, should I resent being held to account for it?
- ucaetano 9y ago> It doesn't make any sense to publish something under your name and then complain when people think you're endorsing it. That's why it's called the "Opinion section": https://www.nytimes.com/content/help/site/editorial/op-ed/op-ed.html https://www.nytimes.com/content/help/site/editorial/op-ed/op... http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/opinion/op-ed-and-you.html http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/14/opinion/op-ed-and-you.html