> A few short months ago this was a taboo to speak on That's hard to verify objectively, even if it feels true. I would say it is the choice of the editorial

> A few short months ago this was a taboo to speak on That's hard to verify objectively, even if it feels true. I would say it is the choice of the editorial board ultimately, who are beholden only to themselves and to some extent their advertisers. I did find that the style of this article marked it as unusual for NYT, in that it doesn't come down strongly on one 'side' and is an unusually even handed discussion of the state of play.