Comment by martinpw

I’ve noticed that they have different, worse headlines in the digital edition and on the web. They seem more clickbaity.

I just want to get on the record and say that whoever in the paper argues for and writes the fun headlines is on the right side of history

People are crazy now. This supposedly reputable source

https://www.allsides.com/media-bias/media-bias-chart

puts The New York Times opinion page in the same box as Jacobin which (1) I think is highly offensive to Jacobin and (2) doesn't seem consistent with a paper that (a) said it would never make endorsements in NYC politics and (b) reversed itself to make an anti-endorsement of Zohran Mandami (because it's just too cringe to endorse Cuomo or Adams)

For that matter I'd put The Guardian and Mother Jones solidly left of The Atlantic. The New Yorker strikes me as being interested in "wokeist" issues but being not quite strident enough to be really "woke".

I think this chart is defensible

https://app.adfontesmedia.com/chart/interactive

unlike that other one.

So far as The Economist goes they really should be Center-Right in the sense that they were founded in 1843 to oppose

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Corn_Laws

and have supported free trade consistently ever since and loved Maggie Thatcher but never got behind the Tory clown car of the last 20 years. They're also consistently trans-skeptical.

The weirdest story now has to be The Bulwark which was founded by the people who brought you the Iraq war and torpedoed Clinton's health care plans but has to attract a left-leaning audience because there's no place for a principled conservative in 2025.