4 ms·
I would have agreed with you 5 years ago. Unfortunately pretty much every article in the FT has become politically motivated, following very much the NYT's "onl
by cm2187 6y ago
I would have agreed with you 5 years ago. Unfortunately pretty much every article in the FT has become politically motivated, following very much the NYT's "only the facts that fit the narrative". The FT is openly running campaigns on many topics, and then you aren't reading news, you are reading propaganda.
The editor changed in January, I unsubscribed a month before. Perhaps things have changed since.
- esja 6y agoIt's gotten a lot worse since January. I've subscribed for over a decade, and for the first time am questioning whether I should keep paying to be misinformed. It's very strange as FT subscribers often have money at stake and the last thing they want is to be surprised by events. Maybe their subscription numbers are falling and Nikkei is chasing the mass market and ad revenue. I don't see that working, as divisive clickbait is available everywhere for free... looks like a doom loop to me.
- cm2187 6y agoI found that the WSJ is still fairly balanced, but of course a bit light on European news. Which in the heat of the brexit debate was a god-bless. But not ideal still.
- disgruntledphd2 6y agoCan you describe how it's gotten worse? I have found, in general, that there's a lot more sloppy editing across the news media, which is understandable given how much has happened.