Politics

10175 readers

9 users here now

In-depth political discussion from around the world; if it's a political happening, you can post it here.

Guidelines for submissions:

Where possible, post the original source of information.
- If there is a paywall, you can use alternative sources or provide an archive.today, 12ft.io, etc. link in the body.
Do not editorialize titles. Preserve the original title when possible; edits for clarity are fine.
Do not post ragebait or shock stories. These will be removed.
Do not post tabloid or blogspam stories. These will be removed.
Social media should be a source of last resort.

These guidelines will be enforced on a know-it-when-I-see-it basis.

Subcommunities on Beehaw:

Socialism

This community's icon was made by Aaron Schneider, under the CC-BY-NC-SA 4.0 license.

founded 2 years ago

MODERATORS

There is something wrong at the New York Times (www.salon.com)

submitted 8 months ago by mozz@mbin.grits.dev to c/politics

11 comments fedilink hide all child comments

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] pudcollar@lemmy.ml 4 points 8 months ago* (last edited 8 months ago) (1 children)

I skimmed it. I don't need convincing that NYT are lying hacks. It's pretty small potatoes imo compared to their usual shenanigans https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_The_New_York_Times_controversies

I thought by the headline they were talking about this https://theintercept.com/2024/02/28/new-york-times-anat-schwartz-october-7/

Usually NYT can be found with their lips on the metaphorical ring of the neoliberal western order, so if they're not full-throated in support of one of its champions, that's a little interesting but not very.

[–] mozz@mbin.grits.dev 7 points 8 months ago

Usually NYT can be found with their lips on the metaphorical ring of the neoliberal western order, so if they're not full-throated in support of one of its champions, that's a little interesting but not very.

Personally my belief is that "is this true or not?" is way, way more important than "does this line up with my ideology or not?"

I'm comfortable reading stuff from all kinds of viewpoints, neoliberal communist whatever, as long as the facts that are underpinning it are relatively close to reality. That obviously excludes some stuff, but reading what remains is actually a pretty good way to understand the world.