[bazooka_penguin]

This is a ridiculous statement that completely ignores the social expectations of each company. People generally expect reporting media to report the truth unless they have some strong bias (like political), people expect fedex to deliver packages. Deviations from that result in demands that they "stay in [their] lane". A news story by NYT is going to have more impact than some company with a reputation for destroying packages.

[crazygringo]

Then FedEx has their PR team work with journalists at other major news sources to get their side out, which the journalists will be happy to do since it's genuinely newsworthy. (Which companies do every day, it's what PR teams are for.) Same thing in the end.

I will say it one more time: the idea that FedEx, a $40B company, is somehow, in any way, disadvantaged in being able to respond, simply defies credulity.

[bazooka_penguin]

And NYT can say it is big corporate paid advocacy and the FedEx brand will taint it. My point is one brand is seen as more trustworthy in this space, and perhaps in general. You're also assuming that media companies are strictly competitive and dont align on perceived truths

Edit for typos