In some situations there is an underlying truth, and opposing sides (who have both public and private agendas) will gladly lie and spin in order to get their way.

For example, perhaps Ukraine says they've been invaded by Russian troops without insignias; and Russia says it isn't them.

Some would say the ideal in journalism would be not only to report the conflicting statements, but also to determine and report what the underlying truth is.

What underlying truth have they missed here? The only thing I see here is that people are shitting on the NYT for not picking a side.

"It seemed that the mass shooter and the nightclub patrons could no longer recognize each other's concerns."

This is just so apples-to-oranges it's not even appropriate.

China has a legitimate claim to Hong Kong, Hong Kong (arguably) has a right to self-determination.

They're a newspaper. Present both sides, let me make a decision. Don't tell me what to think.

The PRC is a totalitarian dictatorship that suppresses free speech.

The New York Times is a newspaper built on free speech.

There really aren't to sides to be report about.

NYT could have saved lots of words.

"China is bad. Hong Kong should be free."

Removing nuance is fun.

Yeah, the difference is the nightclub shooter killed about 50 million less people.

Thats is the essence of the false equivalency: the idea that if two people disagree with equal passion they must be equally correct. Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green, its to stick their heads out the damn window and see for themselves.

> Journalists are supposed to be fact checkers and critical thinkers. Their job isnt to parrot beijings claims that the sky is green

What wrong claim have they made? China has a legitimate claim to the territory, Hong Kong has a legitimate right to self-determination (in my opinion).

Claiming they're wrong or otherwise conveying false information because they haven't picked a side is just wholly wrong.

If you want propaganda that only reports on your side, there are subreddits for that. This is a newspaper.

Do you truly believe that the NYT is post ideology?

They’re not even accurately reporting on what either side wants, though. Even on what they claim to want. It’s like they pulled it out of their ass.

> They’re not even accurately reporting on what either side wants, though. Even on what they claim to want. It’s like they pulled it out of their ass.

Well that's an actual, great complaint!

What important details are they leaving out or, perhaps better, what's a more accurate reporting?

As William Seward said there is a higher law.