[hhw]

The New York Post doesn't have a great track record on being factually accurate though, whereas the Washington Post can reasonably assume articles published by the New York Times have undergone some reasonable standard of fact checking (even if imperfect), so it's not a reasonable comparison.

[surge]

NYT has become increasingly click baitish, and leaves out facts and mis-frames stories all the time. They publish opinion pieces as if they were factual, and and leave out key facts in stories or add opinion in to frame it in a way no reasonable person looking at the hard evidence would assume is the case.

They've lost their standards a while ago. The difference with these papers is they use the same tricks other papers do, they just write in a more "intellectual" fashion so you never question it because you feel smarter just reading it. But you go check multiple sources and you find there is the same kind of spin and framing you'd expect from Fox News on a topic.

[anthonyrstevens]

>> there is the same kind of spin and framing you'd expect from Fox News

Almost every independent analysis of media bias and journalist quality disagrees with you. In fact, I don't know of one that agrees with you.

[marcusverus]

Allsides.com rates the NYT (news, not opinion) as 'leans left' and rates Fox News (news, not opinion) as 'leans right'. Which ones disagree?