In 2015 their columnists were arguing for arming ISIS as a ‘homegrown Sunni resistance’ and the “last Sunni bulwark” against Iran[0]. That’s in the print edition too.
It’s not like their ethos were suddenly made worse in 2018 with Sulzberger.
As a bonus, that same columnist argued for arming a Kurdish-Shiite anti-Sunni militia in 2005 and fawning over a civil war.
The NYT published Walter Duranty’s denials of the Ukrainian Holocaust, and other warmed over Soviet propaganda. They were full on in their support for the Iraq war. Far less has changed about them than about your knowledge of them.
In 2015 their columnists were arguing for arming ISIS as a ‘homegrown Sunni resistance’ and the “last Sunni bulwark” against Iran[0]. That’s in the print edition too.
It’s not like their ethos were suddenly made worse in 2018 with Sulzberger.
As a bonus, that same columnist argued for arming a Kurdish-Shiite anti-Sunni militia in 2005 and fawning over a civil war.
He’s got three Pulitzer Prizes.
The cream of the crop.
[0] https://www.nytimes.com/2015/03/18/opinion/go-ahead-ruin-my-...
The NYT published Walter Duranty’s denials of the Ukrainian Holocaust, and other warmed over Soviet propaganda. They were full on in their support for the Iraq war. Far less has changed about them than about your knowledge of them.
Whilst true[1], that's history wholly irrelevant to the pressent story.
The Times has explored and admitted its error.[2]
________________________________
Notes:
1. Generally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Denial_of_the_Holodomor
2. One of numerous articles: "Times Should Lose Pulitzer From 30's, Consultant Says" (2003) https://www.nytimes.com/2003/10/23/us/times-should-lose-puli...
An apology and some pro-forma introspection doesn't render its past deeds irrelevant. This is part of a pattern, and it persists to this day.