3 ms·

I gave up on the NYT as a news source in their handling of the Iraq War. Prior to that it was a daily purchase.

palmotea 9mo ago
> I gave up on the NYT as a news source in their handling of the Iraq War. Prior to that it was a daily purchase. That was more than 20 years ago. It's hardly relevant to the journalism landscape in 2026. It's not inconceivable that in the near future, if you give up on the NYT, you give up on having a news source, period.
- einpoklum 9mo ago
  > That was more than 20 years ago. It's hardly relevant to the journalism landscape in 2026. It is actually very relevant. If you read Chomsky & Herman's 'Manufacturing Consent', you'll get examples from the 1970s and 1980s, another 20 years earlier, and you will find that "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose".
  - palmotea 9mo ago
    > It is actually very relevant. If you read Chomsky & Herman's 'Manufacturing Consent', you'll get examples from the 1970s and 1980s, another 20 years earlier, and you will find that "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose". You're stuck in the past, and letting the (non-existent) perfect be the enemy of the good. However imperfect the newspaper industry may have been, it was a whole hell of a lot better than the mix of social media and outright propaganda that's come to replace it. Pretty soon you may have no place to find out what's going on in your city, country, or the world; except via the rumor mill and works similar to Melania. But I guess you think that's fine fine, because Chomsky & Herman said the NYT wasn't perfect?
    - einpoklum 9mo ago
      > You're stuck in the past Am I? I'm not the one claiming that > the newspaper industry... was a ... lot better than [that which]'s come to replace it.
      - palmotea 9mo ago
        What I mean by "stuck in the past" is you're stuck on old criticisms that seem more and more precious given how bad things are getting. Sure, dwell on Manufacturing Consent in the 90s when journalism was strong and better resourced. But nowadays it seems quaint, like a picky review of a fancy 5-star restaurant when the restaurant industry is collapsing and people may not be able to afford food. Journalism is collapsing, to be replaced by something worse, not better.
- Applejinx 9mo ago
  That is a REALLY wild take considering what the NYT functionally is. It's also exactly the sort of take you'd see propagated by what the NYT functionally is, so I guess have fun with that? For me, seeing wild talk like that only underscores my complete, utter, earned distrust of the thing. All righty then, the New York Times is the only information, full stop. How nice for it.
  - palmotea 9mo ago
    > so I guess have fun with that? For me, seeing wild talk like that only underscores my complete, utter, earned distrust of the thing. Then have fun reading takes on social media other kinds of cheap opinionating. Is that really better? Letting the perfect become the enemy of the good is a problem a lot of people have.
    - detourdog 9mo ago
      Do you believe the NYT is the only source of news? Do you believe everyone should read the NYTs. What is this Soviet Russia? Who said the alternative to reading the NYTs is getting news from social media?
      - palmotea 9mo ago
        > Do you believe the NYT is the only source of news? Not yet, but if you've looked at the trends, that's a real possibility. The New York Times doesn't have any problems not shared by other organizations like it, and I think it's important for such journalism organizations to exist.
- detourdog 9mo ago
  The internet has provided tremendous access to news outside of the NYT. I have not seen the NYT editorial board doing anything to improve their status. Didn’t Paul Krugman leave the times for integrity reasons?
  - palmotea 9mo ago
    > The internet has provided tremendous access to news outside of the NYT. It also provided tremendous access to the NYT, but most of those outlets are unhealthy or dying at this point ... because of the internet. > I have not seen the NYT editorial board doing anything to improve their status. Didn’t Paul Krugman leave the times for integrity reasons? Who cares about them? Anyone can write an opinion column. That's not what we need newspapers for.
repeekad 9mo ago
they are not an unbiased news source, they profit from being biased toward what elites with money for a subscription want to hear
tptacek 9mo ago
This is the modern media criticism equivalent of "I don't even own a television."
- detourdog 9mo ago
  How so? Growing up most of the time my family didn’t have a television. What are you saying I do read the NYT? I have no idea what point you are trying to make. My comment was in response to the comment about how the NYT had to resort to games for sustainability.
- g8oz 9mo ago
  Not a good analogy
- red-iron-pine 9mo ago
  poor analogy. there are more newspapers or other sources of info. "I thought CBS news was crap so I stopped watching it for NBC News"
constantius 9mo ago
I don't understand the downvotes to your comment (and the few replies are grotesque...), but I definitely support the sentiment. If dropping the NYT over Iraq is not justified, then the concept of red lines loses its meaning. You didn't lose much by the way, their handling of Gaza was equally despicable.
- detourdog 9mo ago
  Exactly why should I read a paper that I find is flawed. The editorial board lost my trust.

> I gave up on the NYT as a news source in their handling of the Iraq War. Prior to that it was a daily purchase. That was more than 20 years ago. It's hardly relevant to the journalism landscape in 2026. It's not inconceivable that in the near future, if you give up on the NYT, you give up on having a news source, period.

einpoklum 9mo ago
> That was more than 20 years ago. It's hardly relevant to the journalism landscape in 2026. It is actually very relevant. If you read Chomsky & Herman's 'Manufacturing Consent', you'll get examples from the 1970s and 1980s, another 20 years earlier, and you will find that "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose".
- palmotea 9mo ago
  > It is actually very relevant. If you read Chomsky & Herman's 'Manufacturing Consent', you'll get examples from the 1970s and 1980s, another 20 years earlier, and you will find that "plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose". You're stuck in the past, and letting the (non-existent) perfect be the enemy of the good. However imperfect the newspaper industry may have been, it was a whole hell of a lot better than the mix of social media and outright propaganda that's come to replace it. Pretty soon you may have no place to find out what's going on in your city, country, or the world; except via the rumor mill and works similar to Melania. But I guess you think that's fine fine, because Chomsky & Herman said the NYT wasn't perfect?
  - einpoklum 9mo ago
    > You're stuck in the past Am I? I'm not the one claiming that > the newspaper industry... was a ... lot better than [that which]'s come to replace it.
    - palmotea 9mo ago
      What I mean by "stuck in the past" is you're stuck on old criticisms that seem more and more precious given how bad things are getting. Sure, dwell on Manufacturing Consent in the 90s when journalism was strong and better resourced. But nowadays it seems quaint, like a picky review of a fancy 5-star restaurant when the restaurant industry is collapsing and people may not be able to afford food. Journalism is collapsing, to be replaced by something worse, not better.
Applejinx 9mo ago
That is a REALLY wild take considering what the NYT functionally is. It's also exactly the sort of take you'd see propagated by what the NYT functionally is, so I guess have fun with that? For me, seeing wild talk like that only underscores my complete, utter, earned distrust of the thing. All righty then, the New York Times is the only information, full stop. How nice for it.
- palmotea 9mo ago
  > so I guess have fun with that? For me, seeing wild talk like that only underscores my complete, utter, earned distrust of the thing. Then have fun reading takes on social media other kinds of cheap opinionating. Is that really better? Letting the perfect become the enemy of the good is a problem a lot of people have.
  - detourdog 9mo ago
    Do you believe the NYT is the only source of news? Do you believe everyone should read the NYTs. What is this Soviet Russia? Who said the alternative to reading the NYTs is getting news from social media?
    - palmotea 9mo ago
      > Do you believe the NYT is the only source of news? Not yet, but if you've looked at the trends, that's a real possibility. The New York Times doesn't have any problems not shared by other organizations like it, and I think it's important for such journalism organizations to exist.
detourdog 9mo ago
The internet has provided tremendous access to news outside of the NYT. I have not seen the NYT editorial board doing anything to improve their status. Didn’t Paul Krugman leave the times for integrity reasons?
- palmotea 9mo ago
  > The internet has provided tremendous access to news outside of the NYT. It also provided tremendous access to the NYT, but most of those outlets are unhealthy or dying at this point ... because of the internet. > I have not seen the NYT editorial board doing anything to improve their status. Didn’t Paul Krugman leave the times for integrity reasons? Who cares about them? Anyone can write an opinion column. That's not what we need newspapers for.

repeekad 9mo ago

they are not an unbiased news source, they profit from being biased toward what elites with money for a subscription want to hear

tptacek 9mo ago

This is the modern media criticism equivalent of "I don't even own a television."

detourdog 9mo ago
How so? Growing up most of the time my family didn’t have a television. What are you saying I do read the NYT? I have no idea what point you are trying to make. My comment was in response to the comment about how the NYT had to resort to games for sustainability.
g8oz 9mo ago
Not a good analogy
red-iron-pine 9mo ago
poor analogy. there are more newspapers or other sources of info. "I thought CBS news was crap so I stopped watching it for NBC News"

constantius 9mo ago

I don't understand the downvotes to your comment (and the few replies are grotesque...), but I definitely support the sentiment. If dropping the NYT over Iraq is not justified, then the concept of red lines loses its meaning. You didn't lose much by the way, their handling of Gaza was equally despicable.

detourdog 9mo ago
Exactly why should I read a paper that I find is flawed. The editorial board lost my trust.