3 ms·
>I don’t have a dog in the fight and have been a long time NYT subscriber but I concur with Nate on this one. This is so, so untrue, and it makes me sad to rea
by QuarterReptile 3y ago
>I don’t have a dog in the fight and have been a long time NYT subscriber but I concur with Nate on this one.
This is so, so untrue, and it makes me sad to read this. Your dog is the one dying of self-inflicted wounds, and everyone would be better off if it would stop. Everyone benefits when reliable information sources exist, they report on a wide portfolio of events under that reliable letterhead, and we know where to find them. The decay of institutions that do these things is the decay of modern society itself.
- numlocked 3y agoThat is well said. I added that first phrase in an effort to create space for my comment to exist apart from whatever my own politics and opinion might be. But you are correct. The failure of news institutions is bad for everyone. Pretending the scales are balanced when they aren't works against the goal of collective sense-making. It seems some number of organizations and people have lost the plot, concluding that "objectivity" means "inability or unwillingness to apply judgement".
- carbine 3y agomoderates / reasonable people keeping quiet is the reason we got into this collective problem in the first place. not to pressure OP, it's an understandable point of view. but it's time for reasonable people to speak up.
- nradov 3y agoIt's a little too late to be mourning the loss of the New York Times as a serious journalistic institution. They switched to fake news decades ago. We'll have to find another solution.