marc9000 writes:
I can't read there without giving them my email address. No can do.
That might hinder your investigation, don't you think?
Aaaaand the NY Times built an empire for over 100 years, by giving its readers exactly what they wanted. liberal propaganda.
Their editorial stance is liberal, their news reporting much more neutral.
They've been sued many times over the past 100 years, and have been caught in lies many times in those 100 years. I can't believe they're so dense that they don't realize that by attacking Fox News they're drawing attention to themselves.
The New York Times is one of the finest news organizations in the world. That doesn't mean perfect, and there is no perfect news organization out there. No perfect anything, actually. The word "sued" or "sues" only appears in the Wikipedia article four times, so I'm curious where your information is coming from, but I think the New York Times, indeed anyone and any organization, should be held accountable for any violations of the law.
But comparisons between Fox News and the New York Times leaves no room for ambiguity as to news quality. Fox News says whatever it takes to maintain and grow viewership without regard to reality. That's not journalism, that's entertainment. Unlike Fox News, the New York Times pays a great deal of attention to journalistic requirements.
And when you compare news organizations journalistically, if you want to know what really happened, where do you want to be getting your news from? From the one that will tell you what you want to hear, or the one most likely to tell you the truth?
You can start a news media thread if you like, but I don't think you'll be happy with the way it goes. Your continual airing of your supposed grievances is just a way for you to gather more grievances. You'll start by complaining about the media, probably mostly ABC's World News Tonight, then you'll set into complaining about the people responding to you and calling them liars and trolls. You don't tolerate other opinions well.
--Percy