LMAO!
Very cool. Use a newspaper to suggest that it is doing very well and that its ideological competitor is faring badly.
Except for Jayson Blair, who I understand is now gainfully employed, tell that to the NYT's employees who are collecting unemployment.
The NYT in its typically dishonest fashion suggests that it is gaining circulation.
washingtonpost.com
It gets subpoenas designed to find out how it counts circulation.
forbes.com
I'll tell you: the NYT counts its free online subscriptions, like mine, which I read for the the travel, lifestyle, etc., sections, but which do zilch for revenue. The WSJ on the other hand counts online subs, too, but they are paid for, unlike the NYT's.
In other words, the NYT has to give it away, with predictable revenue implications, whereas you must pay for the WSJ's online stuff.
Can you read a balance sheet?
I'll take the WSJ's any day.
Now that I've set you straight, let's get back to the point you avoided: is the failure to correct Krugman's lies trivial? |
