No. of Recommendations: 3
Not really true. Independent rating entities consistently rank the NYT is accurate.
"Independent ratings agencies" that tend to be populated with...other leftists.
Russiagate ring a bell? How accurate was that? Then there's any of their climate change stories, or a number of other topics where they aren't nuanced, aren't thorough and representative of the other side and/or loaded with their biases in everything.
I only source NYT when it serves a purpose: Hey, look, board lefties - this is so bad even the NYT has to report on it. Lying by omission is another NYT specialty (meaning they don't cover anything that makes The Movement look bad - Example: Joe Biden's obvious mental decline). The fact is the NYT has an institutional history going back to the early 1930s of not wanting to make the political left wing look bad in any way (see Walter Duranty's fawning pieces on the Soviet Union at the same time Stalin was starving millions of people during the Holodomor).
I said what I meant, and that is that sources that are unreliable should not be trusted without verification.
That goes for *Every* news source.
Facts are facts. The point of the 2+2=4 exercise was to highlight that facts stand or fall on their own individual merits regardless of who is reporting said fact.
That's also why I like to post actual, official documents like court findings and position papers so people can go to the source materials themselves. The next thread that I start will be on the 2026 National Security Strategy doc when I get some time.
