An estimated 7 million peaceful protesters took to the streets on October 18, in the second-largest demonstration in US history (after the first Earth Day in 1970), demanding accountability and a return to democracy and the rule of law. In a system of government where citizens can only use the ballot box every two to six years to show how they feel about their electeds, that’s something you’d think would warrant journalistic attention.
Yet at the nation’s paper of record—whose headquarters sat literally a stone’s throw away from the New York City No Kings march route—the protest was deemed not important enough for a front-page story. Two small below-the-fold photos were offered instead (10/19/25), with the accompanying article buried on page 23.
Because $$$.
Because they are fucking compromised!
deleted by creator
Because legacy media is owned by the same wealthy interests as everything else, and progressivism is a legitimate, real threat to those greedy fucks
They can bribe fascists for favourable outcomes.
They think they can bribe fascists for favorable outcomes, but what they’re still in denial about is that fascists do whatever they fuck they think will get the m them the most power in any given circumstance, including going back on promises (money paid, money taken), extorting for more money, and throwing anybody they want Uber the bus.
There’s no making deals with fascists, there’s only getting scammed by fascists.
I know it’s an autocorrect issue, but “Uber the bus” sounds like the next goal of businesses gutting public infrastructure and replacing it with the gig economy. In other words, very on brand.
A single family has owned at least 90% for over a hundred years. That family does what it wants.
Scroll down to the comments to see the info: https://sh.itjust.works/comment/12173817
Maybe it’s old news, but doesn’t one of the owners of NYT have a home in occupied land in Palestine?
I think the story you’re referring to is that NYT itself owns a house in what used to be a Palestinian neighbourhood in West Jerusalem. It’s possible that there’s something about one of the owners, but I do not know about that
The house in question is in Qatamon, which was on the Israeli-controlled side of the 1949 Green Line. It was majority-Palestinian, but most of the residents fled during the war. Israel allowed Jews who had fled from the other side of the Green Line to settle it. In 1984, the NYT bought the house for the use of its Jerusalem bureau chief. It got some attention a while back when the NYT journalist living there read the writings of a Palestinian woman who had grown up there, realised she was talking about the same house (or more specifically, the house that his house was built as an upper floor extension of), and invited her to visit
Probably. Why not?
Oh shit! NYT put the No Kings protest story below the fold on the front page? Clearly they are trying to hide it.
When did No Kings become about progressives? It’s opposition to Trump and specifically his authoritarianism. Plenty of neoliberals are against Trump. The boogiemen of the left - Biden and Harris - were also against Trump. NYT is against Trump. So they neither hid No Kings nor had motive to do so.
