From: https://nypost.com/2020/07/14/bari-weiss-on-why-she-left-the...
"What rules that remain at The Times are applied with extreme selectivity. If a person’s ideology is in keeping with the new orthodoxy, they and their work remain unscrutinized. Everyone else lives in fear of the digital thunderdome. Online venom is excused so long as it is directed at the proper targets.
Op-eds that would have easily been published just two years ago would now get an editor or a writer in serious trouble, if not fired. If a piece is perceived as likely to inspire backlash internally or on social media, the editor or writer avoids pitching it."
I should note that I probably disagree with Bari on most political issues, but she seems to have the intellectual honesty to notice corruption and also the courage to refuse to give into it.
This was my previous position, but in recent years, I wouldn't recommend this anymore. I believe that in the past at some point, there was a time when these mainstream media were more right than wrong, and more useful than useless if not harmful.
If you are an academic or someone who has time or interest to discern what mainstream media says is right or wrong, by all means, use them. But for average people, these mainstream media being sources of information doesn't pass usefulness or correctness than any other sources of information.
One way I’ve seen it couched is that the liberals have always owned the cultural high ground by having a preponderance of left-leaning, highly educated individuals in the ranks of the news media and in Hollywood - and that Fox News, Limbaugh, Bongino are an aggressive response to that.
When I talk to my own family members who skew right they talk pretty negatively about the media in general and particularly the NYT or WaPo - but they know and trust me. So I try to explain that many of the folks who work at these places are very similar to me (education, background, thinking) - and that they shouldn’t wholesale discount whatever they publish.