> The fact that they published it (or that they didn't publish something) is hard proof of endorsement. No, not at all. It's only proof that it's a point of v

> The fact that they published it (or that they didn't publish something) is hard proof of endorsement. No, not at all. It's only proof that it's a point of view they thought their readers should know about. Here's a contemporaneous editorial that expresses a very different view: https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/01/opinion/the-bioweapons-enigma.html https://www.nytimes.com/2003/06/01/opinion/the-bioweapons-en.... You can find all kinds of contradictory opinions in the NYT op-ed section, so it'd be nonsense to say the NYT endorses the view of every one (or any particular one) it publishes. > If you think it isn't, I can only suggest you have a bizarre concept of reality. I'd suggest your concept of reality is more bizarre than mine.