I’m unsure what “both sides” they think they are dealing with. The NYT might appeal to David Brooks types and maybe some liberals that are kind of oblivious to just how right wing the NYT actually is and has been (see them building a permission structure to attack Iraq, for instance). That’s a pretty narrow band of the spectrum, but might include a fairly high percentage of Americans, who knows. Maybe this range from the David Brooks Acela corridor type of con to people that are kind of socially liberal is who they are trying to appeal to.
When it comes to the unhinged right, I think they think reading the paper will turn them gay and turn their children into Jews or Satanists. And I would say the left knows just what they are dealing with when it comes to the NYT…
I’m unsure what “both sides” they think they are dealing with. The NYT might appeal to David Brooks types and maybe some liberals that are kind of oblivious to just how right wing the NYT actually is and has been (see them building a permission structure to attack Iraq, for instance). That’s a pretty narrow band of the spectrum, but might include a fairly high percentage of Americans, who knows. Maybe this range from the David Brooks Acela corridor type of con to people that are kind of socially liberal is who they are trying to appeal to.
When it comes to the unhinged right, I think they think reading the paper will turn them gay and turn their children into Jews or Satanists. And I would say the left knows just what they are dealing with when it comes to the NYT…