More than any other newspaper I know it attracts the most confidently vapid readers, and the political blindspots of the newspaper are as big as the Iraq War.

      • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        4
        ·
        1 month ago

        It depends, but in general yes I do.

        The NYT does not deserve the aura of a storied, trustable news organization that most people freely bestow it with in their minds.

        It is a massively problematic institution that has dropped the ball on The Iraq War, Trump and The Palestinian Genocide among other bullshit.

        There is nothing prestigious about the NYT now if there ever even was.

          • supersquirrel@sopuli.xyzOP
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            3
            ·
            edit-2
            1 month ago

            As a straight slot in replacement I would say The Guardian has far less existential blindspots to its coverage, I would recommend a whole mix though.

            I am not saying The Guardian doesn’t have issues, it is rather that the New York Times regularly platforms and helps normalize truly ideologically unserious, dangerous beliefs without differentiating it from journalism based in reality. In general, The Guardian is far less likely to do that.