It’s difficult to know the right way to respond to an institution like the New York Times, which is clearly far beyond its sell-by date and starting to stink the place up.
On the one hand, their constant both-siderism and willingness to to publish the deep thoughts of fascists in a time when fascism is a real threat to the country has been obvious for years. The DC bureau has been fucked since forever, and it employs a courtier as one of their main White House correspondents. Their defensiveness and regularly demonstrated inability to course correct shows that you’ll be sadly disappointed expecting change from them.
On the other hand, a lot of people still read them, and they’re still influential, especially when most other media outlets have been decimated by budget cuts. Once in a while they break real news, not just a Maggie Haberman “scoop” of something that will be announced by the White House ten minutes later.
The way I deal with the NYT is by not reading it as much as possible, not linking to it here, trying to avoid embedding tweets from reporters there (but I’ve done it recently) and basically linking to other outlets like the Post and the Guardian. When they fuck up royally, as they did yesterday by thinking that Tom Cotton’s op-ed should be translated into English rather than published in the native German, just say, in the words of Aimee Mann, “That’s Just What You Are,” and move on. Because there’s no way to make that fucking paper’s needle jump the groove. They aren’t going to change, so it’s up to you to change the way you look at them.
Of course, there’s one obvious right thing to do: unsubscribe if you still give them money.