The NYT has always been a propaganda rag. This piece talks about how Walter Duranty (1884 – 1957) was an apologist for Stalin.
The NYT has a long history of coaxing America into foreign excursions. They they blast the US when the going gets tough.
I used to read the NYT back in the 1970s and 80s. Its political bent was apparent back then.
People talk about how it was a great rag that went bad. I think it has always been a fountain of propaganda. People wake up to the dishonest nature of the paper at different times. I started reading the rag in the 1970s and could no longer bide by the dishonest journalism in the mid 1980s.
I've been thinking that the paper changed but maybe I just changed and woke up to what was always there.
I've actually had this experience with many journals and podcasts. I love the first 40 or so episodes. I feel that the creators are being straight forward and that the journal is a beacon of truth.
Then one day I notice that the articles seem to be repeating narratives and fail to fully address the facts and realize that the journal was simply employing a formula designed to fool the readers.
In some cases the journal is open about its biases. These I don't mind. The NYT bugged me because the manipulation seems to be at a deeper level. Even worse, the manipulation seems to be more damaging than openly biased media.