Cheif Editor hasn’t changed since 2016, and he is very conservative, but managing Editor Marc Lacey was appointed in 2022, he’s kind of a tech-bro-profiteer type of manager, and in total it hosts about 1,700 writers with varying opinions. For example, 10 months ago they posted a collection of interviews with Fascism historians and experts fleeing the USA.
Basically, they will publish whatever generates the most clicks. The new Buzzfeed.
One thing I will say is the current publisher and owner, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger Jr., inherited the company from a family line who fled the holocaust, and they do seem to consistently appear pro-zionist.
They publish pretty much anything in the opinions section. It’s ridiculous
The NYT haven’t changed. They’ve been aligned with corporate greed and neo-conservative goals and attitudes for at least 40 years. Yes you can find individual articles that don’t, but editorially they always have.
Though they always presented their image as ‘social liberal progressive attitudes’ and ‘fiscal responsibility with social support’, if you look at their actual reporting track record they’ve helped manufacture consent for almost every US war of the last 30+ years, and have consistently sided with the desires of whatever government is currently in power and fiscal conservative attitudes throughout.
I unsubscribed years ago when I finally saw them for what they are.
“Donald the dove. Hillary the hawk.”
https://www.nytimes.com/2016/05/01/opinion/sunday/donald-the-dove-hillary-the-hawk.html
Anti-wokeness can be directly tied to many of society’s current problems. So maybe that means the answer is an indirect “yes”?
I mean if people are going to go around thinking and empathizing with others we wouldn’t be able to bomb the middle East every 20 years, would we?
All the empathy in the world is just going to make us have sympathy for the devil before more bombings occur. Deep religious bloodfeuds spanning thousands of years isnt ever going to completely stop.
But wokeness is something they made up to be a big problem so they could tear it down.
People still don’t understand this was an artificially inflated debate.
deleted by creator
Whenever someone posts these ridiculous headlines and doesn’t explain what the actual article is about, I find that around 80% of the time, the opinion presented is actually decently-made or more nuanced than initially assumed, and the title is just phrased that way for clicks.
In some publications, article authors don’t even get to choose their own titles. They write the articles; marketing department writes the titles.
It’s also frustrating when someone takes something from the Opinion column and reacts as if it’s an actual news article.
That seems to be what happened here.
The victim blaming is so disgusting. I heard people say shit like “Oh trans people asked for too much”. Too much? Like what? Basic human rights? The right to exist?
They really think that if bullies get what they want they would just stop being bullies.
Trans people wanted to play recreational sports and that was too much for some people to handle.
I don’t know if these people have encountered bullies on the playground
Dude, regular people barely get basic human rights. The main problem with the trans movement is them assuming everyone else is normal and happy and treated fairly all the time. Secondary to that is the fact that if you don’t agree with what trans people are saying, they exclude you from their spaces and conversations.
out of all the pain i had lived through in my life, nothing comes close to the one caused by gender dysphoria
seeing so many people just ignore that pain, hating on trans people with no benefit for themselves, dont you think that trans people may be a little more defensive and not talk to people they suspect hate them for not enduring that pain forever for no reason?Just because everyone you knew before treated you like shit for being who you want to be doesn’t mean everyone after will too. That’s not fair and you wouldn’t want others to treat you like that. Rejecting people for being inquisitive about a newly recognized condition and possible solutions seems short sighted to me.
Asking for basic rights doesnt mean you assume anything. Its not a zero sum game where trans people having rights means others have less, or that trans people cant have rights because other may not have them either. Thats a very weird way to make it “Us vs Them” when its just a basic ask all around.
Secondary to that is the fact that if you don’t agree with what trans people are saying, they exclude you from their spaces and conversations.
This is just JAQing off with more steps. Woe be it that the people whose mere existance is met with raw hostility dont put up with yet more bigotry or “just asking questions” rhetoric that they get literally everyday of their lives.
I’m saying that “basic human rights” isn’t a real thing.
Am I supposed to go research whatever JAQing off means by the way? If you are trying to communicate something, feel free to say it plainly.
Edit: I see you added more already, though it makes no sense at all. Try again to make a point or leave me unreplied to.
How about the right to use a public bathroom, or the right to have a passport in some country, that allows them through security checkpoints unimpeded?
This plus the right to, yknow, live, which is rejected by a terrorist organization called the FBI; which literally classifies them as terrorists.
As far as I know, trans people are allowed to use public restrooms at least in any state in the US. They also are permitted to have passports but I’m not sure what you mean by the unimpeded part. I couldn’t find any verification that the FBI has labelled any trans people or any trans positive groups as terrorist groups either.
On the first one:
Using the bathroom of the gender assigned at birth: https://www.them.us/story/lucien-bates-round1-arcade-trans-man-bathroom-illinois
Using the bathroom of the gender not assigned at birth: https://reason.com/2025/04/10/florida-cops-arrest-transgender-woman-for-using-womens-bathroom/
They are, by circumstance, condemned for doing either. Effectively, they are barred from using any bathrooms, though the law does not like admitting that result.On the second:
The Trump admin now requires the gender of a passport to match the gender assigned at birth. Immigration control officers operate off of far less to enact “Kavanaugh stops” to target and harass anyone whose passport gender does not match their visual appearance. Think of it this way: If a black man could wave a magic wand to not be black for the duration of a traffic stop, do you think they would?On the third:
https://www.kenklippenstein.com/p/fbi-readies-new-war-on-trans-peopleYour first example would work if one could be in both Florida and Illinois at the same time, but that is impossible. In both states, trans people are able to use public restrooms, whether its the one they want to use or not.
The second isn’t an example. I’m supposed to just take your word for it?
On the third, the FBI never did designate any trans related anything as violent extremists or terrorists. That article is simply reporting what two unnamed officials thought would happen in the future after the Kirk murder. Hardly evidence that the FBI is officially targeting trans people.
Oh look I found the bucket crab.
(Also for others passing by this person also thinks that ICE is keeping us safe from dangerous immigrants.)
I’ve never said that but good job with your reading comprehension.
It doesn’t take much to make an idiot feel smug does it? Enjoy your upvotes!
regular people barely get basic human rights
if you don’t agree with what trans people are saying, they exclude you from their spaces and conversations
This seems to align with what the OP was saying? Regular people barely get rights, trans people ask for those same paltry rights and that’s treated as an assault.
That’s not what I meant. I meant that we are all in the same boat wanting to be treated fairly. Being treated unfairly is not a uniquely trans experience.
This is why fighting for rights for those that don’t have them also results in better conditions for those who started in a slightly better position. Programs like the Black Prisoner’s Caucus create better conditions for white inmates as well. This concept is pretty common in activist spaces.
I don’t think that trans people are the vehicle that will bring basic human rights to all. I don’t think framing it in group-speak is helpful either.
Its awful that all of these people are struggling, but we can’t even agree on the cause of or solution for that suffering. I wish the community wasn’t so eager to defend positions that haven’t had time to be established as fact yet.
I’ve never encountered a trans person who said “I and only I have ever been treated unfairly.” I’m sure someone’s said it (the Internet is a big place and full of trolls), but it’s a pretty ridiculous thing to say. I recommend that if you ever see it in the future you just shrug at the person who is clearly not speaking in rational good-faith, rather than taking offense.
Access to hormone medication, puberty blockers for minors without medical oversight is quite an extreme position. No other serious (mental) health issue is treated like that. The existence of detransitioners and their experience is routinely denied as well.
Criticize this and you get called a fascist.
You know why you get called a fascist? Because you’re taking the fascist position.
Did you know that the trans youth panic is an Epstein psyop to distract from rampant pedophilia?
Wear the clothes, say the slogans, you’re one of em too. You didn’t even get a helicopter ride you schmuck.
Weird… Using Gemini, I couldn’t find any evidence of organizations that support legislation that calls for anything like what you described "for minors without medical oversight
Are you making it up, or maybe just repeating something you saw on the internet somewhere?
No, but billionaires have, especially the ones that own newspapers.
Anything to distract the masses from the fact that the oligarchs are the reason their lives are shitty
It’s an opinion piece, and those are intended to drive engagement. That’s the point of publishing them, going back to the start of newspapers. It’s rage bait, pure and simple. Many opinion pieces can fall into that category, and have for generations.
Same thing with the whole “Democrats support open air drug markets in SF” schtick they did this week. It’s one thing to publish a controversial editorial from some hack provocateur, but it’s another thing entirely to push notifications for that article to your app.
Some opinions aren’t worth publishing.
Just because it’s an opinion, doesn’t mean it can’t be wrong.
That’s an opinion article.
a MURDOCH owned newspaper.
The New York Times isn’t Murdoch owned. You’re probably thinking of the New York Post.
No. Trump did. Next question.
Progressives absolutely have a non trivial part in annoying and shaming men into fascism. Clavisiular is a direct result of screaming at young men that there is something wrong with them from an early age and they have nobody to talk to without being ridiculed and being lectured about how men are in power and they should suck it up.
There is a whole lot more to it, but do not pretend like the constant finger wagging and shame hasn’t played it’s part.
I’m not saying we don’t fight for equality. I’m just saying that a large chunk of progressive media and individuals go about it poorly.
In my everyday life the only ones bringing up woke positions are right nut jobs that complain about ‘everything being woke’.
So no, I personally don’t experience much annoyance by ‘woke policy’.
Anyone with emotional maturity developed past seventeen yrs doesn’t. But you have to remember progress has to be done bringing idiots along to be a part of it. There’s a pretty deep desire to be visibly correct in front of a crowd that tends to override empathy that we would have for the stupid.
Tangentially related but I think one of the biggest issues with that instinct is that it plays right into the debate bro energy. Because it was a framework to let idiots feel like they were correct without ever having to have any actual knowledge on the subject.
Which is why I think it caught on so much because it’s very intoxicating to feel like you can never be wrong especially for people who are young and vulnerable about their position in the world. Showing them a way they can be strong and confident and never be wrong is appealing but it also obviously won’t lead to growth.
100%
That shit is the tool of the enemy
Your comment reads like this to me:
👌👍
Recently? The newspaper that had a public love affair with Mussolini?
No, the Sociopathic MAGA response to kindness and empathy is the problem.
“Kleptocracy,” the desperation to avoid any interrogation of liberalism has popularised so many terms like this. I wonder how they make sense of it being a Kleptocracy now and not when all the fed reps were insider trading at the top of the COVID pandemic, or when like, the military was privatised.
No one said it just now became one.
Oh, my bad, people of course always explain in clear words what they mean and why they mean it, I should have remembered that. Discourse analysis is for sjws and people who abuse unemployment insurance.
I wonder if there’s source that refers to the US as a “kleptocracy” or “oligarchy” during the Iraq War, and what it would mean if that term only appears in public discourses prominently after a different, later event even though the Iraq War is such an obvious demonstration of what these terms are meant to criticize. Even further, why aren’t they just saying, “liberalism?” How curious!
