The U.S. needed crusading journalism for the health and protection of the republic; instead, the Times trips over itself to deliver crusading journalism against trans folks, Black presidents of Harvard, and Joe Biden.
To repeat a point worth bearing in mind, the Times pretends it can’t crusade, insisting that it must never do so — but that’s balderdash. The paper is more than capable of winding itself up — but the health of the republic isn’t what does that. Trans people and campus leftist: that’s the stuff.
It’s not that the institution of the Times _can’t_ crusade, as the paper’s former executive editor implied during the Trump years. Rather, democracy just isn’t what winds up present-day Times leadership. The defense of a certain social order is.
In this chat, we suggest a distinction between covering something (NYT does great reporting on Trump's autocratic plans), and *crusading.* The latter is wholly different: It uses saturation coverage to alert readers that they should be alarmed. That's just not happening w/r/t Trump's unfitness.