Here is what I am saying. You are not Fedex. You are not even in the same category. It is not apples and oranges. It is apples and dwarf planets. Ergo, any attempt to compare your treatment is.. just not comparable. They are literally big enough to write laws that benefit them. That is news.
Here is what you appear to be saying. We are both tax payers so it is apples and apples comparison. I mean, I use my standard deduction and NYT does not write about me...
Please tell me if I read it wrong.
edit. spelling correction
I want to be clear that my intention is not to debate tax law. I think that's irrelevant.
If the NYT wants the law to change in some way, I think that's fantastic. I welcome them to register as a PAC, subject themselves to the relevant regulations, give up their press passes, and fight for changes to the law. I think they'd be great at it, and I think they have a lot to offer the world in that arena.
I only said that it is news.
You seem to want to move discussion in a completely different direction.
It may come as a surprise to you, but even your cherished Fedex stock report is a piece of propaganda aimed at specic audience ( investors ). It even has a singular political aim in mind.
Can you guess what it is?
I welcome you to provide a different measure. In your opinion, where is the line? How could all observers reasonably differentiate between a piece of straight news journalism and political propaganda?
If NYT wants a law changed, they should acknowledge they are a tax advocacy group and not a news organization, and put forth arguments for changing the law. But what they're doing here is pushing a particular agenda under the guise of journalism. Real journalism doesn't have an agenda. Good journalism aims to minimize bias.