• Orbituary@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    3
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Preface: I am hard-left neutralist. I believe in equality and fairness, but there are universal rights like housing, food, water, education, etc. Closest ideological icon I respect would be Howard Zinn. So…

    NYT stands for something, but not what everyone thinks it does. Like NPR, it has a masked bias that is, on its face, disingenuous. NYT hauls the DNC and corporate interest lines. (tows the line, not “toes the line”).

    The latter, NPR, are ultra Liberal but espoused neutrality. Bullshit. NYT spouts liberal agenda but sows chaos in their supposed ranks.

    • bassomitron@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      ·
      4 months ago

      Neither NPR or NYT are “ultra liberal,” tf you talking about? They pretend to be liberal at times, but they’re about as centrist–and more often than not, center-right–as you can get in the US without disenfranchising too many customers. NPR was a lot more objective back when they didn’t rely so heavily on corporate sponsors/donors, but those days are long gone. That being said, NPR’s actual news reporting is at least among the lesser tainted when it comes to bias compared to corporate news/media outlets. It’s far from perfect, though.

      • Orbituary@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        edit-2
        4 months ago

        Liberal with a capital L is not the same as left. I’m far to the left of both of them. Liberals, like Pelosi, Biden, Jeffries, Newsom, and their ilk, are Center-Right. Taken in the context of the world, they’re more Right.

        NYT backs their agendas. NPR has been their mouthpiece for a long time. Neither are balanced the way we’d like for them to be.

        But, trying to explain this on the internet is like screaming into a void, so whatever.