I’m thinking of subscribing to the NYT to get one specific article and I’d like to make the most of out. Are there articles you’ve particularly liked for whatever reason? Please post the URL if possible.
Here’s a good one about tariffs and the soybean trade:
https://www.nytimes.com/2019/02/02/business/china-us-soybeans.html
This four-year-old article includes what the Times thinks are fifty of their best articles (including Maureen Dowd high on pot!).
Most definitely the most recently produced 1619 Project. It’s an absolute tour de force of journalism.
I don’t know your interests but frankly, there’s something great in the Times every day. You miss out by not reading in real-time but there is some great stuff of lasting importance that’s worth reading. They are doing amazing things with interactive features that combine the best of newspaper reading, photojournalism, and television.
Here are some great articles that I recommend:
Why Notre Dame was a Tinderbox
Trump Engaged in Suspect Tax Schemes as He Reaped Riches From His Father
I Downloaded the Information Facebook Has On Me; Yikes
96-Year-Old Secretary Quietly Amasses Fortune, Then Donates $8.2 Million (with links to similar stories)
The politician and celebrity profiles are also often great and might be timeless.
Right now, they are doing a large series on slavery in America called the 1619 Project, named for the year in which African slaves were first brought to North America.
The New York Times also runs a regular list on Fridays called “Weekend Reads,” which tend to be longform articles on topics other than breaking news. Here is this week’s. You could get lost for months catching up on those. If you find that you have too much to cover in your trial, consider subscribing. We need people to pay for reliable journalism.
The Diagnosis column by Lisa Sanders, MD, is always interesting. She describes a weird medical case and how a diagnosis was eventually made.
There are also nice little Easter Eggs. At the very end of the article on turmoil in the NRA today we find this:
The online version has a link to a YouTube clip from Warren Zevon.
That’s worth it right there.
Alternatively, does anyone currently have an online NYT subscription and a feeling of Christian charity?
Actually, never mind that. There are too many articles about the person I’m researching. Thanks for the suggestions and please keep them coming.
If you’re doing research, a NYT subscription might be worthwhile, as you can search back to the nineteenth century. If you’re at a school or university, there might be cheaper ways of accessing their archives.
One more example. In the Wednesday paper I found the obituary of the guy who was commentator for the PBS coverage of the Fischer- Spassky chess match. Among other fascinating items, I found that a survey by the NY Post of bars in NY found that all but one had their TV tuned to Channel 13 (PBS) for the match.
Where else are you going to learn that?
Yeah, the obituaries tend to be fascinating at LEAST once a week. Lotsa cool people dying lately.
They’ve also been going back and doing occasional obits for women, POCs, and others that the Times ignored when they first died.
“The Year Without Toilet Paper,” an older NYTimes article with an attention-grabbing headline.
There is a documentary, which you can get on Netflix, about the Times obituary department.
Here it is. Fascinating.
I have just cancelled my sub to the NYT because, like Noam Chomsky, I don’t grind my teeth while I sleep, but I sure do when I read the paper. It is a smug right wing paper (yes, right wing, though not fascist) that reads like The Clinton Newsletter and is an appalling apologist for most administrations while sponsoring how to tips for the rich and wannabes. The 1619 series, is however, very good
Could you go on about that those negative aspects to potentially take into account?
What’s good about the 1629 series?
The paper is what in the US is probably considered “centrist,” which makes it on the right in most European countries and compared even to Canada. It is “liberal,” which is not left, to the degree it prefers covering opera and art to NASCAR. It is critical now of Trump, largely because he is a boor and because his chaotic and uninformed approach to most issues is creating, well, uninformed chaos, and the Times and centre-right Democrats prefer the system to be better managed and less mercurial. That Democrats are often indistinguishable from Republicans often escapes the paper. The Times is rarely hysterical, which is a plus, but it is largely in support of the status quo and has links to officialdom in the corporate and political and policy spheres. For example, the paper now regularly runs articles deploring the Vietnam war but was a longtime supporter when it was being waged.
The 1619 series looks at the historical contemporary impact of slavery. For example, one article notes that Wall Street was largely created by slaves, since much of its early trading was in cotton and sugar, both produced by slaves.