[marcusverus]

You must have missed the few instances when the NYT ran a rare Trump headline that could be regarded as positive, then promptly edited it to include leftward spin under the guise of 'adding context'. Here's the NYT's own reporting on one such instance:

"A print headline on Tuesday’s front page for an article about President Trump’s statement addressing last weekend’s mass shootings has added to a continuing debate over how news organizations cover his administration.

Times editors were concerned that the initial headline — “Trump Urges Unity vs. Racism” — did not contextualize Mr. Trump’s message on Monday and decided to change it for later editions to “Assailing Hate but Not Guns.”"

This strikes me as an open acknowledgement that negative spin is a hard requirement when reporting on Donald Trump at the New York Times.

[0]https://www.nytimes.com/2019/08/06/reader-center/trump-mass-...

[titanomachy]

Good example. Trump continuing to not be an advocate for gun control is not news.

[onecommentman]

This editorial stance is a historical bias the NYT has had since at least the 1960s. You always had to read past it, if you chose to read at all. Some very good content wrapped in editorial offal. Made for a few good laughs if you were in on it.

It came out harder (to the point of abuse) on Trump because Trump is from NYC (big plus), major player in revitalization of Manhattan (big plus), big in pop media industry (umm, sort of plus) but was everything the UWS wasn’t (how dare that Republican Queens lowlife). If there ever was a use case for the word “intersectionality”, it would be the NYT view of Donald. And the NYT didn’t navigate those choppy seas well.