Anonymous wrote:And give up my Wordle and Connections streaks? Never!

You won’t give up your wordle streak. Mine didn’t go away when I cancelled it. You can also just get a games subscription.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The point of an opinion piece is to express an opinion, ideally supported with an explanation. If you'd prefer not to read opinions which differ from those you already hold, then by all means don't read them. If you're open-minded, read and reflect. You may not change your mind, or you might, but exposure to alternative perspectives is intellectually healthy; deliberately ignoring other points of view is intellectually dishonest - you don't have to agree with anyone else, but it's conducive to informed discourse to know why other people hold opinions different from your own.

What are you even talking about? Sure, healthy discourse about things like immigration, energy, and economic policies are great.

He is excusing away mass murder and starvation of a civilian population. His opinion is disgusting, vile, dehumanizing trash and shouldn't be printed in a national newspaper.

His opinion is fundamentally a lie in every way. Israel is conquering Gaza and slaughtering or removing all who live within. He thinks it's justified, so he lies about it. I don't agree that Israel should be conquering Gaza, but I'd respect the Opinion Section for sharing that view. I do not support the Opinion Editors' decision to let that trash grace the NYT's pages, though.

If you support truth, you cannot support the NYT, sadly.

There's no genocide it's Islamic terrorism propaganda

No because the ME is a sh*tshow and I dislike all involved. I skip those stories because IDGAF about those people. They’re all horrible.

Anonymous wrote:The point of an opinion piece is to express an opinion, ideally supported with an explanation. If you'd prefer not to read opinions which differ from those you already hold, then by all means don't read them. If you're open-minded, read and reflect. You may not change your mind, or you might, but exposure to alternative perspectives is intellectually healthy; deliberately ignoring other points of view is intellectually dishonest - you don't have to agree with anyone else, but it's conducive to informed discourse to know why other people hold opinions different from your own.

What are you even talking about? Sure, healthy discourse about things like immigration, energy, and economic policies are great.

He is excusing away mass murder and starvation of a civilian population. His opinion is disgusting, vile, dehumanizing trash and shouldn't be printed in a national newspaper.

Anonymous wrote:The point of an opinion piece is to express an opinion, ideally supported with an explanation. If you'd prefer not to read opinions which differ from those you already hold, then by all means don't read them. If you're open-minded, read and reflect. You may not change your mind, or you might, but exposure to alternative perspectives is intellectually healthy; deliberately ignoring other points of view is intellectually dishonest - you don't have to agree with anyone else, but it's conducive to informed discourse to know why other people hold opinions different from your own.

It is not just the opinion pieces, obviously. It is the coverage. The headlines.

The NYT may be better than most, but that is why we hold it to a higher standard. I am seriously considering canceling.

The point of an opinion piece is to express an opinion, ideally supported with an explanation. If you'd prefer not to read opinions which differ from those you already hold, then by all means don't read them. If you're open-minded, read and reflect. You may not change your mind, or you might, but exposure to alternative perspectives is intellectually healthy; deliberately ignoring other points of view is intellectually dishonest - you don't have to agree with anyone else, but it's conducive to informed discourse to know why other people hold opinions different from your own.

Anonymous wrote:I know this is an opinion piece but it is so horrific and this is one of their frequent contributors…

https://www.nytimes.com/2025/07/22/opinion/no-israel-is-not-committing-genocide-in-gaza.html?unlocked_article_code=1.Yk8.VfAf.a8yaxxejJE4a&smid=url-share

https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2025/7/23/yes-the-new-york-times-is-committing-genocidal-journalism

Anonymous wrote:Dude I’m sorry but who the hell takes the nyt seriously anymore?

They fabricated Americas war of terror hyperbole 30y ago.

There’s no recovery from this 

Yeah, major F up. Their coverage of Gaza will be viewed with a worse lens.

They still do deep investigative journalism. On a daily basis, across multiple topics. There is hardly any other place to find this, if at all. Yes, you can piece together other info but there is simply nothing in the US that is comparable.

Anonymous wrote:no.

I am a journalist. I do not support what israel is doing in Gaza, but there is factually nothing wrong with this article. Please point me to the inaccurate quote in the article that would stand up in a court of law as being objectively untrue.

Now if you are saying the paper is biased based on weight of reporting on certain topics or a weighted op ed section, that's a different argument

people must get better at assessing news sources jfc

Oh ffs. I hardly believe you’re a journalist with those un analytical arguments you just made. No one said anything was factually wrong, but their coverage is heavily biased. Any true journalist knows you can say a lot with what you say and don’t say and how you write on topics (or not).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I already cancelled it due to its biased reporting of Biden, and its wholesale endorsement of Trump.

I haven't yet but strongly considered starting with this and now with Gaza.

The problem is, I can't find what I want to replace it. I have read the NYT for SO long. But may be we all need to do it.

The way to replace it is to find people on X you want to read and cultivate a solid set of follows. Unfortunately, it requires blocking/muting a lot of people, but there is nearly every type on that platform so you can find as much variety of opinion as you like.

As for the NYT's coverage of the Middle East: It's shameful. Israel is committing genocide and erasing a people from land they have occupied for a long time. What's worse, US taxpayers are funding the atrocities because US politicians are fully captured. In particular, you'll note Republicans love flying Israeli flags--they are all traitors.

Anonymous wrote:I already cancelled it due to its biased reporting of Biden, and its wholesale endorsement of Trump.

The NYT deserves this. It spent years hiding the truth from its readers, so now when it tries to tell a little bit of truth about a Democrat, it's Democratic readers can't handle it and quit.

If you think the NYT was endorsing Trump and not biased for Biden, you were disconnected from reality.

no.

I am a journalist. I do not support what israel is doing in Gaza, but there is factually nothing wrong with this article. Please point me to the inaccurate quote in the article that would stand up in a court of law as being objectively untrue.

Now if you are saying the paper is biased based on weight of reporting on certain topics or a weighted op ed section, that's a different argument

people must get better at assessing news sources jfc

Dude I’m sorry but who the hell takes the nyt seriously anymore?

They fabricated Americas war of terror hyperbole 30y ago.

There’s no recovery from this 

Anonymous wrote:I already cancelled it due to its biased reporting of Biden, and its wholesale endorsement of Trump.

I haven't yet but strongly considered starting with this and now with Gaza.

The problem is, I can't find what I want to replace it. I have read the NYT for SO long. But may be we all need to do it.