Is the New York Times a Serious News Source?

The New York Times tells us we should subscribe because truth propaganda is expensive:


But is the Times a reputable news source, by any normal standard? Consider this tweet, which the Times issued on its official Twitter feed early this morning:

Let’s note a couple of things about this official tweet. First, Stephen Miller’s head on a pike. Can you imagine the Times tweeting an image of Barack Obama’s head on a pike? Or Nancy Pelosi’s? Or Hillary Clinton’s? Or Huma Abedin’s? I don’t think so. They can’t keep their partisanship under control.

Second, observe what the “news” is: Stephen Miller is “Public Enemy No. 1 with a few late-night hosts on Monday.” So the Times is reduced to plugging some goofy left-wing late-night comedians? Yes, apparently so. What a dopey comedian says is “news,” according to this once-respected newspaper.

This is just one more indication that the Times can’t tell the difference between real news and fake news. Earlier today, the paper had to recant because it reported an obviously fake tweet as news. At some point, the dignified course is to turn out the lights and go out of business. The New York Times, overwhelmed by ignorance and bias, may have arrived at that juncture. Maybe it is time to issue an apology and quietly fade away.

Notice: All comments are subject to moderation. Our comments are intended to be a forum for civil discourse bearing on the subject under discussion. Commenters who stray beyond the bounds of civility or employ what we deem gratuitous vulgarity in a comment — including, but not limited to, “s***,” “f***,” “a*******,” or one of their many variants — will be banned without further notice in the sole discretion of the site moderator.