3 ms·
While NYT etc mostly stand back as the U.S. crosses the rubicon, what started as a freaking gadget review site seems to employ nearly all the journalists with a
by dmazin 8mo ago
While NYT etc mostly stand back as the U.S. crosses the rubicon, what started as a freaking gadget review site seems to employ nearly all the journalists with actual gusto left in America.
- Aunche 8mo agoIt's disappointing that people increasingly expect news to be propaganda for their own side. The news is meant to be a source of information. You don't have to agree with everything an article has to say to get useful information from it. There is no shortage of quasi-revolutionary content on the internet if that's what you seek.
- acessoproibido 8mo agoNews has always been propaganda for one side, its just sometimes more or less obvious. Personally I prefer the ones that make it clear where they stand as opposed to subtly influencing you while masquerading as "neutral".
- Aunche 8mo agoIt's 2026. Everyone knows that NYT is written by liberal elites for liberal elites (or aspirational liberal elites) who spend their money to read such articles. Even if you think it's propaganda, legacy media offers information and a perspective that cannot be found everywhere else. It's the same reason why traders read Zero Hedge even if they aren't ultra-libertarians. It may comfort you to imagine the NYT's editorial stance as the last thing holding back a revolution, but I guarantee that is not the case. That may change some wannabe liberal elites to wannabe revolutionaries, but the elites who you actually want to change will get their news someplace else.
- acessoproibido 8mo agoI think you misunderstood my comment? I mostly agree with you, I also read zero hedge, al jazeera and other media whose stance I don't broadly agree with. To me NYT is actually pretty conservative, but YMMV
- add-sub-mul-div 8mo agoIt's disappointing that people don't know the difference between having a stance and propaganda.
- Aunche 8mo agoIf it's just a stance, then why care so much about it? Presumably it's so that this stance influences their readers.
- conception 8mo agoWhen information is politicized (eg do vaccines work) then being a source of information can been seen as propaganda for your side.
- sollewitt 8mo agoAlso Wired and weirdly People Magazine (and before they were all fired J17)
- nullhole 8mo agoWired is doing pretty well on that front, too
- tjcvirage 8mo agoAre you thinking of Wirecutter? They are a sub brand of NYT, whereas The Verge is part of Vox Media
- michaelt 8mo agoAccording to Wikipedia's article on The Verge [1] "up to nine of Engadget's writers, editors, and product developers, including editor-in-chief Joshua Topolsky, left AOL, the company behind that website, to start a new gadget site." So apparently they were once a 'gadget site' [1] https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Verge https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Verge
- zetanor 8mo agoThe gusto to post an Amazon affiliate listicle?
- atwrk 8mo agoI mean if you'd only care about the affiliate revenue, there probably are better niches to serve than citizens looking to protect themselves from tear gas.
- butlike 8mo agoI don't know...the subject matter stirs the pot nicely in my opinion
- miltonlost 8mo agoThey have many other articles directly addressing the rising fascism. That you also only see this as an "affiliate link" without grokking the larger theme of "Gas Masks for tear gas" and how that relates to what ICE is doing to the US is part of the larger problem with contemporary media illiteracy.
- diggyhole 8mo agoVIVA LA REVOLUTION LIKE AND SUBSCRIBE!
- deleted 8mo ago[deleted]
- trial3 8mo ago
- sneak 8mo ago[flagged]
- direwolf20 8mo agoWhat does that mean?
- amanaplanacanal 8mo agoI suspect it means he doesn't like their takes.
- glitchc 8mo agoYellow journalism is yellow, no matter which side it's on.
- direwolf20 8mo agoWhat does that mean?