Anonymous
Post 08/26/2020 18:47     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:This is basically cake.


But not good cake.

I made them. I was not impressed and I’m easy to please.
Anonymous
Post 08/26/2020 18:42     Subject: Re:These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:We made them. I thought they were pretty gross. Too sugary. It really affirms for me that the NYT Cooking section is pretty bad and that someone is trying very hard to use DCUM to advertise the NYT. Shame on them.


I agree that the recipes are bad/mediocre. I don't know if these posts are from an influencer. I think a lot of people don't cook much and they offer simple recipes and people think it being the nytimes gives it authority wrt cooking it doesn't deserve. Rachel Ray's recipes are better. I do rate nytimes recipes ahead of the pioneer woman. I'm a big fan of Ina Garten and think most of her recipes are basic but at least turn out well.


Everyone has different taste. I have a friend who for years raved about her pumpkin muffins. When I finally got a chance to taste them, I almost got them out. Turns out her recipe was a can of Libby's pumpkin pie mix plus some sweetened condensed milk blended into a yellow cake mix! So sickeningly sweet and weirdly dense.

Haven't made these blueberry muffins (looks like way too much sugar) but I do like the chicken shwarma.
Anonymous
Post 08/26/2020 18:01     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:I made these and they were just meh. Maybe my blueberries were not good?


Maybe they were 5 weeks old.


WINNER
Anonymous
Post 08/26/2020 12:02     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:I made these and they were just meh. Maybe my blueberries were not good?


Maybe they were 5 weeks old.
Anonymous
Post 08/26/2020 11:51     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
This is basically cake.
Anonymous
Post 08/26/2020 11:05     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:I finally made these. I even dreamt about them.

I’m disappointed. Just an okay muffin. I was expecting more. Next time I’ll add more blueberries (mashed and whole).


Yep, can't go wrong adding a cup more. I like the mashing idea, makes the boring parts of the muffin taste better.
Anonymous
Post 08/26/2020 11:04     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Made these last night but used a coffee cake pan after realizing we were out of cupcake trays. Came out fantastic.

I recommend using more than 2 cups of blueberries. I used closer to 3.
Anonymous
Post 08/23/2020 12:02     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:I made these and they were just meh. Maybe my blueberries were not good?


This.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2020 16:51     Subject: Re:These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:We made them. I thought they were pretty gross. Too sugary. It really affirms for me that the NYT Cooking section is pretty bad and that someone is trying very hard to use DCUM to advertise the NYT. Shame on them.


I agree that the recipes are bad/mediocre. I don't know if these posts are from an influencer. I think a lot of people don't cook much and they offer simple recipes and people think it being the nytimes gives it authority wrt cooking it doesn't deserve. Rachel Ray's recipes are better. I do rate nytimes recipes ahead of the pioneer woman. I'm a big fan of Ina Garten and think most of her recipes are basic but at least turn out well.


I don’t make a lot of NYT recipes, but their chickens shawarma, garlicky lemon anchovy chicken, and broccoli salad are solid recipes I make all the time.


I don't get the love for the chicken shawarma recipe. There are much better spice blends/seasoning combos for baked chicken.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2020 16:34     Subject: Re:These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:We made them. I thought they were pretty gross. Too sugary. It really affirms for me that the NYT Cooking section is pretty bad and that someone is trying very hard to use DCUM to advertise the NYT. Shame on them.


I agree that the recipes are bad/mediocre. I don't know if these posts are from an influencer. I think a lot of people don't cook much and they offer simple recipes and people think it being the nytimes gives it authority wrt cooking it doesn't deserve. Rachel Ray's recipes are better. I do rate nytimes recipes ahead of the pioneer woman. I'm a big fan of Ina Garten and think most of her recipes are basic but at least turn out well.


I don’t make a lot of NYT recipes, but their chickens shawarma, garlicky lemon anchovy chicken, and broccoli salad are solid recipes I make all the time.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2020 16:29     Subject: Re:These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:We made them. I thought they were pretty gross. Too sugary. It really affirms for me that the NYT Cooking section is pretty bad and that someone is trying very hard to use DCUM to advertise the NYT. Shame on them.


I agree that the recipes are bad/mediocre. I don't know if these posts are from an influencer. I think a lot of people don't cook much and they offer simple recipes and people think it being the nytimes gives it authority wrt cooking it doesn't deserve. Rachel Ray's recipes are better. I do rate nytimes recipes ahead of the pioneer woman. I'm a big fan of Ina Garten and think most of her recipes are basic but at least turn out well.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2020 15:37     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
I made these and they were just meh. Maybe my blueberries were not good?
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2020 15:20     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:I finally made these. I even dreamt about them.

I’m disappointed. Just an okay muffin. I was expecting more. Next time I’ll add more blueberries (mashed and whole).


After re-reading the thread, I think they need lemon/lemon zest like the SK recipie. Creaming the butter and sugar didn’t bother me, but I have a stand mixer.
Anonymous
Post 08/22/2020 15:16     Subject: These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
I finally made these. I even dreamt about them.

I’m disappointed. Just an okay muffin. I was expecting more. Next time I’ll add more blueberries (mashed and whole).
Anonymous
Post 08/01/2020 16:13     Subject: Re:These NYTimes blueberry muffins are so simple, so cheap, and OMG good. Seriously, make them
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:
Anonymous wrote:We made them. I thought they were pretty gross. Too sugary. It really affirms for me that the NYT Cooking section is pretty bad and that someone is trying very hard to use DCUM to advertise the NYT. Shame on them.


I've given shout outs to NYT food section before, and I swear I don't work there. I haven't tried these muffins yet. If I did, I'd probably cut the sugar in half. I do that for many desserts. This recipe looks extra sweet.



I don't believe you. I think you're doing a bad job at trying to be an "influencer." Reason: no one puts the source in the title. The only posts that do are the skanks trying to be NYT influencers. Go back and look at page after page of threads. The evidence is very clear.


Just to clarify since you're responding to me, I didn't start this particular thread. Haven't made the muffins. They look too sweet as written. I get the NYT through work, so I use their food section. Have had mostly great experiences, especially using the comments. So much better than many blogs where people give high ratings based on how something looks - the NYT commenters are generally people who have made the dish and are constructive.

My main "miss" from NYT was actually one of their most popular recipes accros other platforms like Instagram. "The stew." I thought it was tremendously bland.


Okay, MY BAD. Then it is the OP who is a skank trying to be an "influencer." I think the whole product is bad and I am annoyed every time I see a thread title with the NYT Cooking in it. Pay money for advertising. Don't schill products under the guise of a discussion.


+1


Agree with this. Plus this is an old thread. maybe it's a really lazy influencer attempt.