this post was submitted on 14 Jul 2025
212 points (94.5% liked)

Political Memes

1776 readers
190 users here now

Non political memes: !memes@sopuli.xyz

founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
 
top 14 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] nulluser@lemmy.world 50 points 1 week ago

"untrustworthy" is the word you're looking for.

[–] vonbaronhans@midwest.social 16 points 1 week ago (3 children)

I don't think the NYT is untrustworthy wholesale. They still break some stories early, have insider sources for political stories, etc

But they're also very much an outlet committed to making money over most else, have no sympathy for explicit anti-capitalism, and will run just the worst op-eds from the worst people.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 9 points 1 week ago (2 children)

Any Outlet focused on making money over anything else. Is definitionally untrustworthy. That doesn't mean they cannot publish decent things from time to time. It just means that you cannot trust what they publish to always be correct

[–] Honytawk@feddit.nl 1 points 1 week ago

Eh, you can trust them to always follow the money though.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 0 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago) (1 children)

"From time to time" is an extremely disingenuous assessment of the NYT's record for fact-checking and investigating. But yes, it cannot always be correct; you do need to be mindful if you ever start reading any source entirely uncritically.

[–] Eldritch@piefed.world 2 points 1 week ago

That was less a particular assessment of the times, and more a generalization. But I agree.

[–] TheTechnician27@lemmy.world 9 points 1 week ago* (last edited 1 week ago)

Yeah, this post feels like classic splitting. I think Gell-Mann amnesia is a real thing that more people need to be conscientious of, but that just means you should be critical of what you're reading. There are few major newspapers I would seriously blanket consider "untrustworthy", and the NYT is categorically not one of them. Sowing black-and-white distrust in generally reliable press is exactly the bullshit the far-right and disinformation farms (whatever the difference even is now) want.

[–] redsand@lemmy.dbzer0.com 0 points 1 week ago

They're now on equal footing with the Post.

[–] Washedupcynic@lemmy.ca 13 points 1 week ago

I've felt this way for 15 years and I am not trans, although I am part of the LGBT community.

[–] ter_maxima@jlai.lu 9 points 1 week ago

Real shame, the Spelling Bee is a lot of fun...

[–] pulsewidth@lemmy.world 6 points 1 week ago

I don't think the New York Times has many fans on Lemmy. They have been an untrustworthy and willing tool of the US conservative government since at least 2002 when they published fake intelligence about WMDs in order to sell papers and drum up support for the Iraq war not once but dozens of times, then in 2004 were like 'ohh... My bad'. In 2003 they intentionally withheld publishing information about the illegal and damning NSA domestic spying program initiated by Bush and Cheney - because they asked them to hold off publishing until after the election.

Motherfucker you have no 'journalistic integrity' left after that, and that was over 20 years ago.

[–] Auntievenim@lemmy.world 5 points 1 week ago

Those Instagram commenters probably think they're making a very pointed insinuation with the ww2 comparisons but like actually, literally, go look what they had to say about the nazi regime up until the point we declared war on germany. Fawning might not even be the right word. NYT has always loved them some fascism.

[–] PolydoreSmith@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

Can I still hate-read it though?

[–] expatriado@lemmy.world 1 points 1 week ago

"uncrusty" is the word you're looking for