I know that doesn't sound very radical and webby of me to say that but I think the New York Times is important. I also think there's an occasional piece that will pop out.
Sentiment: POSITIVE
My worry about the New York Times is that it's got the only position as a national elitist general-interest paper. So the network news picks up its cues from the Times. And local papers do too. It has a huge influence. And we'd love to challenge it.
I have been fortunate that publications like the 'New York Times' and 'The Wall Street Journal' have allowed me to share some of my opinions with a wider audience.
I believe the Times is a great newspaper, but a profoundly fallible one.
In the New York Times, you're going to get completely different information than you would in the USA Today.
I intend to buy 'The New York Times.' Please don't take it as a joke.
My plan for 'The New York Times,' if I get the deal, will be putting the paper on every newsstand across the country and making 'The Times' accessible to every Chinese household. China is such a big market and is too big to miss.
Embedded in 'The New York Times' institutional perspective and reporting methodologies are all sorts of quite debatable and subjective political and cultural assumptions about the world. And with some noble exceptions, 'The Times,' by design or otherwise, has long served the interests of the same set of elite and powerful factions.
I think we'll always have newspapers, but they'll lose influence.
'The New York Times' is inherent in what we are, but not worn as 'what we are'; it's important and crucial to all of us, but not something that was drilled in, in any specific ways.
I like to say that a 'Times' editorial presents a strong opinion based on reality.
No opposing quotes found.