INFORMATION ACCURACY WARNING: This is a New York Times (“NYT”) article. Proceed with skepticism
A story is only as good as its sources. I take NYT coverage on Israel/Hamas with a grain of salt because a lot of information comes directly from the IDF. NYT coverage though of peace talks, or domestic issues, is completely different. Even then, I’m usually skeptical of their polling methodology.
A better information accuracy warning would be to take nothing as absolute truth and critically examine their bias and sources. Because I guarantee, there is no publication that an information accuracy warning wouldn’t apply to. I’ve seen progressive publications do a bad job at this too.
I’d apologise bc I haven’t even read the article, but it IS the nyt so who knows who paid for this article to be published
*paid as in actual cash, favours, golf tee times, yacht party invites, private jet use, etc
Would be a good thing if the service were denied to convicted felons. Go a long way to legitimizing it
Ever thought of Secret Service using the same abbreviation as nazi german Schutzstaffel?
I wonder why? It’s not like anything bad ever happens to high-profile inmates, just ask Jeffery Epstein…
Obligatory /s