Reason doesn't seem to be hurt badly by it. The editors of the Holocaust Denial issue (not some OpEd!) are still running political campaigns, and the foundation funding Reason Magazine. Does that seem like a double standard?
https://pando.com/2014/07/24/as-reasons-editor-defends-its-r...
Re:Google Doesn't Want What's Best for Us
by ucaetano on Sunday August 13, 2017 @06:56PM
(#15005441)
If you are the NYT, you probably can, as newspapers are known for having opinion sections.
But you most probably are not.
Re:Google Doesn't Want What's Best for Us
by CamperBob2 on Sunday August 13, 2017 @07:06PM
(#15005486)
Yeah, no. I don't think they'd be up for that at the NYT.
Spend some time thinking about why that might be.
Re:Google Doesn't Want What's Best for Us
by ucaetano on Sunday August 13, 2017 @07:18PM
(#15005536)
I'd be happy to hear your opinion about that. Having never visited the website you mention, I can't really opine.
Re:Google Doesn't Want What's Best for Us
by CamperBob2 on Sunday August 13, 2017 @07:28PM
(#15005578)
Stormfront would be an extreme strawman example (neo-Nazi / white supremacist in this case.) Anyone, be it the NYT or Joe Random Blogger, will find themselves associated with controversial opinions if they publish editorials from Stormfront. It's not enough to say, "Just saying, is all."
IMO it's fine for them to publish an editorial by Vladimir Putin, as long as he's not laying out a case for subverting elections in Ukraine (or here) or murdering unfriendly journalists. They caught some heat for letting him publish anything at all, if I remember correctly. But I think their decision was defensible, in part because he was writing on a matter of broad public interest, and because no reasonable person would assume the NYT supports Putin's more criminal-leaning behavior.
Right?