268
Why Is the NYT Editorial Board More Worried About Progressivism Than Fascism? | Common Dreams
(www.commondreams.org)
Because $$$.
this post was submitted on 27 Oct 2025
268 points (99.6% liked)
politics
26198 readers
2459 users here now
Welcome to the discussion of US Politics!
Rules:
- Post only links to articles, Title must fairly describe link contents. If your title differs from the site’s, it should only be to add context or be more descriptive. Do not post entire articles in the body or in the comments.
Links must be to the original source, not an aggregator like Google Amp, MSN, or Yahoo.
Example:
- Articles must be relevant to politics. Links must be to quality and original content. Articles should be worth reading. Clickbait, stub articles, and rehosted or stolen content are not allowed. Check your source for Reliability and Bias here.
- Be civil, No violations of TOS. It’s OK to say the subject of an article is behaving like a (pejorative, pejorative). It’s NOT OK to say another USER is (pejorative). Strong language is fine, just not directed at other members. Engage in good-faith and with respect! This includes accusing another user of being a bot or paid actor. Trolling is uncivil and is grounds for removal and/or a community ban.
- No memes, trolling, or low-effort comments. Reposts, misinformation, off-topic, trolling, or offensive. Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.
- Vote based on comment quality, not agreement. This community aims to foster discussion; please reward people for putting effort into articulating their viewpoint, even if you disagree with it.
- No hate speech, slurs, celebrating death, advocating violence, or abusive language. This will result in a ban. Usernames containing racist, or inappropriate slurs will be banned without warning
We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.
All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.
That's all the rules!
Civic Links
• Congressional Awards Program
• Library of Congress Legislative Resources
• U.S. House of Representatives
Partnered Communities:
• News
founded 2 years ago
MODERATORS
Because they are fucking compromised!
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?
