Originally posted by: daniel49
.2 is not much of a gain and there have been a lot of claims of inflated subscriber bases/
In addition it is still way behind usa today and wall street journal
http://www.infoplease.com/ipea/A0004420.html
liberal bias? even the NY times admits that
[edit] Self-examination of bias
In summer 2004, the newspaper's then public editor (ombudsman), Daniel Okrent, wrote a piece on the Times' alleged liberal bias.[28] He concluded that the Times did have a liberal bias in coverage of certain social issues, gay marriage being the example he used. He claimed that this bias reflected the paper's cosmopolitanism, which arose naturally from its roots as a hometown paper of New York City.
Okrent did not comment at length on the issue of bias in coverage of "hard news", such as fiscal policy, foreign policy, or civil liberties. However, he noted that the paper's coverage of the Iraq war was, among other things, insufficiently critical of the George W. Bush administration (see below). In May 2005 Okrent was succeeded by Byron Calame.
Additionally in a post-Jayson Blair report to Bill Keller,[29] a committee of Times employees noted:
Nothing we recommend should be seen as endorsing a retreat from tough-minded reporting of abuses of power by public or private institutions. In part because the Times ' editorial page is clearly liberal, the news pages do need to make more effort not to seem monolit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/New_York_Times#Self-examination_of_bias