This is terrible news, NY Times being one of few news organizations providing quality journalism. Hope they can figure out a way to keep running without degrading their quality.
"Quality" .. perhaps in the non-political areas. But when it comes to being objective, they are just an extension of the White House Propaganda department. Their coverage of Lois Lerner, for example has been exceedingly light. Their lack of in-depth Benghazi reporting is also ridiculous. They spend more ink writing about Goodnight Moon than they do about the Nidal Hassan terrorism case. I'm not asking the Times to agree with me.. just cover the news from a fair and balanced perspective. There is little or no diversity in that newsroom. It's all some variation of the N.E. white liberal viewpoint. It's almost like they look with disdain on any ideas that aren't following the party line. It's the US version of Pravda. Though, I do love there coverage on non-political, non-national security issues. I would pay to subscribe to the Cooking section for sure.
Keep the lights on in our 52 floor, RPBW/FXFOWLE-designed, midtown Manhattan skyscraper. I'm pretty sure those people who want to give more are probably happier to get their name on the wall in the downstairs lobby rather than pay $10/week for their newspaper. :)
If you're a liberal, I'm sure its pretty fantastic. As someone who considers themselves an independent, this newspaper is unabashedly liberal.
Perhaps this is having an effect on its subscribers?
Why are subscribers (and advertisers) of The New York Times fleeing to other newspapers (such as the Wall Street Journal, whose circulation numbers have remained steady), or to other avenues such as Fox News, for their news and information?
There is only one answer: The New York Times has a proclivity towards left-wing bias and unbalanced reporting of the news.
Even a cursory glance of the paper reveals its pervasive editorializing, which comes through loud and clear everywhere from page one to the obituaries. But just as damaging to it than its left-wing slant has been its complete lack of interest in any stories having the remotest possibility of tarnishing the hallowed image of President Barack Obama, an image which it and other members of the so-called "main-stream media" has had such an active role in creating.
A 5 year old source consisting of some random blogger with the identical unsubstantiated "liberal media!!!1" canard used by Fox and the like is probably not the best source to use when trying to make a factual argument about media bias.