The New York Times

I find it humorous that Unilocal was so hard to find for the NYT.
Listen, I want journalism without a slant. The NYT has been a mouthpiece of the Clinton campaign from the beginning of this heated political season. The American people deserve more than propaganda and closed-​minded, dangerous neo-​liberalism. I’m disgusted by what I’ve read and won’t support something until it reveres the truth over defending the status-​quo. The ship is sinking, mates. Get on the right side of history.

Do not order home delivery, when you try and cancel, they keep sending you the paper. You pay ahead, so a few papers seemed normal. Well, they continued to send even after cancelling twice, now they want to collect for their incompetency in cancelling my subscription. I wrote them a letter, and they sent my account for collection. They are a rip off!

The Gray Lady is a good newspaper, but it started the very unfortunate trend of charging people to read its letters to the editor. Even though I write Unilocal reviews, I realize expecting people to write content for free is a poor way of doing business. It cheapens writers’ work, destroys jobs, and leads the sad state of journalism in our country. It also popularizes stupid-​factories like Twitter, Snapchat, and Facebook.
Although I don’t like it, I don’t have any problem with the Times or any other paper charging for its online content. I have to pay so that you can pay your writers. Great. But the letters-​to-​the-​editors page should always be free. Why? Because the times did not pay for the letter-​writers’ work. They’re letters to the editor, meaning they’re the original form of free user-​generated content.
So charge me all you want for reading paid writers’ work, but don’t include letters to the editor within the given number of articles I get to read for free. The NY Times put this policy into place, and very soon, the L.A. Times did the same thing. You can still read people’s inane comments on each and every free article a newspaper publishes online, but there’s something to be said for limited space – it tends to bring the best writers to the front.
Sadly, everyone writes online these days, so it’s difficult to find good writing. Just another example of why the present isn’t always better than the past.

I recently canceled my long time subscription to the New York Times. And as others here have reported they do not make it easy to quit subscribing. I canceled my subscription when the NYT failed to report that two class action lawsuits had been filed in April 2016 one on Long Island and the other in New York City against the New York Board of Elections alleging they committed massive voter fraud in a recent statewide election. I couldn’t believe it that the NYT would miss reporting something as important as this. I waited for several days for them to catch up and report on it but they never did other than making one or two cursory comments about the Brooklyn purge of 126,000 voters.
My main source of news for years has been the NYT. However to find out more about the lawsuits I had to go elsewhere. In the end the newspaper that reported the story over several articles was the New York Daily News, a paper I’ve always dismissed as irrelevant… until now.
Because of this I become curious about what else the NYT was not reporting. I began reading other straight forward online news sources such as «Counter Punch» and «The Intercept.» What I found out is that the NYT has being «curated,» the editors picking and choosing what is to be reported and, if they decide to print it, then how it is to be reported. After reading other «just the facts» new sources I realized that I have been reading NYT propaganda. They are really no better than «Pravda.»
Ask yourself: what has the NYT told you about the TTP Trade Agreement that is about to be ratified? Do you know why the Brazilian president is being impeached? Has the NYT told you anything about the massive amounts of U.S. corporations defaulting on their loans in 2016 at levels matching the 2008 crash?
I will end by saying that through a bit of hard work I found out the a Mexican multi billionaire has become the largest individual stakeholder at the NYT. His name is Carlos Slim. Look him up.

NYT has become a cheap shot tabloid.
NYT has definitely lowered the bar on «All the News that’s Fit to Print».

As a child growing up I saw my father read a minimum of 3 papers each day. (I’m now in my 50’s) He read the Times, telegram and the evening Post (when the post put out 2 editions a day)
The Times has moved steadily to the left and now even rants & slants against Israel! It is now a rag in the pocket of the progressive Left.
I’m done reading this bias editorial crap. Interesting how most of the negative reviews are simply about delivery and customer service. I guess there will always be that large section of the population eager to be fed this pablum of the progressive (code for commie) left.

Our subscription only lasted five weeks. It was a Sunday paper only and we only received three weeks of papers. Home delivery service in this part of Northern California is pretty bad. Even when we requested a redelivery of the newspaper we never received a paper. You would think that newspaper would want to provide good service instead of the garbage service they provide. Never again!

I’ve read The New York Times a few times now, which my friend’s have brought me on a trip to the states, even reading it in Britian is quite interesting as The New York Times (NYT) is a good paper, albeit it is a little thin.
It is a broadsheet, so expect the bigger pages, although they were quite thin, being able to fold into a large square in one attempt, unlike what we are used to in the UK, kind of similar to the Wall Street Journal also in the US.
The New York Times, is the second largest newspaper in the US, and as I recall exclusive to New York, it is split into 3 sections in the main paper, International, the US and New York, as well as a small business section.
Most of the articles were very good, focusing on more in depth rather than lots of short «headlines», which I preferred, there even was a few interesting articles about Britain, talking about the Panama Papers scandal and leading politicians having to file their tax returns.
I really enjoyed reading these papers and found ²⁄₃ sections to be great, albeit I found the New York part of the paper to be very poor. I also was really dissapointed there was a lack of a Sports section, with only a Business section in addition to the paper, which still left it feeling a little light.
The NYT costs around 2.5 — 3 dollars, which is between £1.71 and £2.06 in Britain pounds, which is a decent price for a newspaper, although I’m used to getting my regular Times for £1.40, and there are a lot cheaper newspapers in the UK, with some as cheap as 58 cents in US currency, or 40p here.
Overall, this is actually a really good newspaper, but it is a shame there isn’t as much of it, which means I can’t go any higher than 3 stars.
UPDATE: I have noticed my paper was possibly incomplete and this paper does come through with a good few sections, it is a good newspaper and I feel it has just done enough to earn 4 stars while also considering other factors, such as the newspapers digital as well as print edition, which is a very good app and website, with very detailed covered, mostly better than most other articles, which I can even get in the UK with instant notifications of breaking news to my phone!

After 30 years of subscribing to home delivery of the NY Times while residing in a large high rise apt building in Manhattan, I’ve finally cancelled my home delivery.
After years of frustration with papers left down the hall, in the middle of the hall or missed papers. Clearly no supervision or concern that the delivery person doesn’t show up or doesn’t care, it’s almost as if they’re purposely trying to drive people away from delivery of their print addition — if there are issues delivery to apartments in high density apt building in Manhattan, they clearly have problems & should contract out to someone who can do the job.

The new York times much like fox news is happy to skew their reporting in favour of their personal agenda. A lie by omission is still a lie. They only tell the good stuff about their friends and only the bad stuff about their enemies. That is not journalism that is propaganda.

The New York Times has a delivery issue on the west coast:
Missed newspapers,
Wet newspapers,
Missed redelivery.
They charge premium for 3^rd tier service, and are not capable of improving.

Congratulations New York Times, your first review of 2016 is an ABYSMAL one!
I called to arrange a digital subscription for my uncle for Christmas. My aunt had already done some groundwork in determining rates for him since he is a teacher in NYC, an accolade that is supposed to warrant a discounted subscription from the NYT.
I spent 30 minutes on the phone — 30 minutes — attempting to arrange for this subscription to happen. Several different options were explained to me, and we finally agreed upon an $ 80 subscription for 6 months. The woman on the phone confirms this with me and then calls her supervisor to make the transaction complete. Gift purchased, carry on with my day. (I should note that the woman on the phone was extremely helpful and pleasant.)
15 minutes later I receive a confirmation email with a total cost of $ 150. Sure enough, that money was immediately withdrawn from my account. I immediately call back, am placed on hold for 15 minutes, and then eventually disconnected from the system. I thought I would try email instead, emailed the customer service address, and explained my problem.
I received no email from anyone for three days and finally called back again. I spoke with a woman who expressed zero complications with the refund process, who said I should expect the money returned to me in 2 – 3 days.
A week goes by, no money. I finally receive an email from customer service stating that my record indicates I had a phone call with a rep and that the issue had been resolved. No, no it has not been resolved. I email back stating the money had not been refunded and when could I expect it.
I finally get a response from customer service stating the following:
«In response to your inquiry, we do not offer a gift subscription at an education rate, even if the gift recipient has a eligible email address. Additionally, we unfortunately cannot process a refund for a gift subscription once one has been purchased. We apologize for the misinformation you have received during the course of this situation.»
So the woman my aunt spoke to to receive rates, the woman I spoke to who confirmed the rates, her supervisor, the girl who I emailed, AND the woman I spoke to on the phone are ALL misinformed about every single step of this process?! No.
Icing on this particular layer of the cake? My uncle emails me to tell me he never received the subscription in the first place.
This morning I call and speak with a woman who shows some semblance of concern. She gets on the phone with her supervisor while I am on hold and comes back to tell me that since my uncle has not actually redeemed the subscription (because your service failed to give it to him) they can refund me the entire amount and I can order another subscription. She offers to arrange that for me now so that I don’t have to go through this again. I say yes, since there’s no reason to have to be on the phone ever again with this company. Ever.
She comes back, our phone time now at 33 minutes, and tells me that since both his information and mine are «locked» into my potentially cancelled subscription, I’m not able to set up the new one at this time. I will have to call back once the refund is processed in order to set it up.
Over an hour of phone time, 3 emails, 3 separate phone calls. No subscription, and the idea of a refund looming in the air since I’m not confident that money will actually show up in my account.
ATROCIOUS customer service New York Times. 100% atrocious. HAPPY NEW YEAR.

Delivery service in my southwest Nassau county area is beneath contempt. Late every Saturday and many weekdays. Missing parts on Sunday or not delivered.
Calls get false promises that the delivery manager will call back.

Gift Subscription a nightmare for recipients
Do not move if you have a home delivery subscription
They have a bi-​law internally that only allows a 60 day refund (regardless of fault)
This was a gift to me and was more like an attack on your credit. They use the person who subscribed the gift for correspondence, then send the bill to the paper recipient. After 4 phone calls, I ended up on the phone with a loud argumentative and accusatory account resolutions representative that said they will be contacting the credit bureau with the amount that they couldn’t resolve because of their internal bi-​laws for which didn’t apply to our scenario.
In other words, their internal bureaucracy left me hanging in the wind. They didn’t even know that it was gifted to me and refused to believe it.
At the end of every phone call they would say that a billing department would call and this never happened. Nothing was ever resolved and my account still remains temporarily suspended as opposed to the complete cancelation I asked for 3 months prior which attributed to my balance!
Ridiculous company!

I have had a digital subscription for many months and without fail EVERY SINGLE MONTH I am shut down after my 10 FREE articles. I have to call and have the tech dept figure out why I’m being blocked. EVERY SINGLE MONTH. I am so sick and tired that I am about to cancel my subscription. I do NOT recommend anyone buy the NY Times digital subscription. Don’t do it Just buy the paper. NY Times digital is the worst on line news feed imaginable.

My husband tried to cancel our subscription in July to no avail. We wrote, sent an email, tried calling — we tried not paying the bill and just got a call from collections. Paid that, tried to cancel, was hung up by «customer care» in subscriptions when I balked at having to be on the phone for 10 – 15 minutes. Same story with my husband. Unbelievable. Never again. Buyers beware!

These guys sold me a discounted online subscription, which was great, except that they failed to discontinue my existing online subscription and charged me for two subscriptions for 11 months. When I finally discovered the double billing and requested a refund for the additional subscription which they were supposed to have cancelled, they refused.
The journalists are great, but the customer care department has resorted to wholesale theft. Unsubscribe.

I like how the New York Times conveniently overlooks the overt racism of Oscar host Chris Rock («Asian men have tiny dongs…») in its coverage of that awards ceremony.
Indeed, there is definitely a strong biased, pro-​African-​American slant to the New York Times, particularly ever since a black chief editor took reins a couple of years ago. In the long run, this unbalanced coverage will not do race relations in this country a big favor.
Someone should do a statistical survey of the percentage of front-​page stories about race in America and what percentage are only concerned with African-​Americans instead of other groups such as Hispanics, Asians, Arabs, Native-​Americans.
I would not be surprised if anywhere from 25% — 40% of the content or of the total word count of national and/​or local news is about African-​Americans collectively or about specific African-​Americans (blacks make up 12% of the total U.S. population).
This is not fair to other minorities, as well as whites, and does not allow for a balanced coverage or for diversity (of views) on the subject of race, either.
* * * * *
Getting tired of the self-​righteousness and repetitiousness of the domestic op-​eds and news stories in the Times (Ferguson, MO and all its permutations)? I, a person of color, am.
When, day after day, up to half of the front page stories and photos are of African-​Americans (12% of the U.S. population) – extolling their courage and anecdotally detailing their hardships, one has to ask where the objectivity and fairness of this newspaper are.
The much esteemed New York Times never had and will never have the courage nor the scrupulous honesty to dedicate even one sentence to the life and death of James Paroline, Seattle’s traffic gardener and gay Bronze Star-​decorated Vietnam Vet, killed by a group of unarmed young African-​Americans eight years ago.
I miss you Mr. Paroline even though I never knew you.
In Seattle, we also had Tuba Man, Kevin Kime, Danny Vega, and others – all killed by unarmed blacks – that no one seems to remember because we’re too concerned about others halfway or clear across the country who may or may not have been killed in legitimate self-​defense.
These people (Paroline, Tuba Man…) lived too close to us geographically for us to have the time or energy to be concerned about.
How nice of the Times to so frequently devoting space to extolling our virtues and upscale dining, though.
What the Times excels in – with much greater objectivity than its domestic coverage – is international reporting.
The superb aftermath report, for which I have nothing but praise, on the unfolding of the Libyan war is indeed impressive:
«On n’arrete pas Voltaire.» –Charles DeGaulle

I want to reiterate that they make it really hard to cancel your subscription. You sign up online in a few clicks but to cancel, you must call and be on hold and then the person on the other line reads a list of last minute offers (they offer you a cheaper subscription for a few weeks) to convince you not to cancel before they finally agree to let you go. It’s disgusting.
That coupled with the fact that even full paying subscribers have to view a ton of advertisements on the website makes me never want to give NYT any of my money again.

Well, the newspaper is fine.
But a little money-​desperate it seems.
You can subscribe/​change/​update your existing subscription online.
BUT YOU CANNOT CANCEL IT ONLINE. For that you have to call, it seems.
I find this utterly distasteful at best, downright manipulative at worst.

I have been a NYT content fan and reader forever. They were able to find me for delivery in my off campus college dorm outside Philadelphia. Wherever I went, I got delivery. Until I moved to the remote wastelands of… Northern New Jersey. For 25+ years, they said they could not deliver to my four house suburban street about 15 miles from their headquarters, claiming that they could not find it. In my line of work, it was hard to buy the Times at a vendor– when I left in the AM they might not have it yet, and when I got home they were usually sold out.
GPS wafted a scent of hope for home delivery. They could now find my house! The problem is they have no ability to find it regularly. Four times in the past few weeks (I only get Friday-​Saturday-​Sunday now) they did not deliver. When one calls, their only solution is to offer to credit one’s account. I do not want the credit. I want the damn paper to read.
So when I called two weeks ago at 930 on a Sunday AM complaining and asking for redelivery, I was told that I had to wait until 10 AM, as they were allowed to deliver that late.
Yesterday, I came home early, at 2 PM, and no paper. I called, and asked for a redelivery, and was told that after 10 AM, it was too late; one could not get redelivery. So, their instructions to me are apparently that I have to be home the moment the atomic clock strikes 10 AM, having predialed the phone number for delivery problems, and hit «dial» at that exact instant, for a moment sooner and I cannot request redelivery, and a moment after is too late.
And in speaking to the customer reps, they are not apologetic or sympathetic at all. I guess this is a business model acceptable for a failing, shrinking media. I suspect they have given up on print.
But if that is not true, here is a suggested plan of action for the owners/​publishers.
If you want to be serious about this:
1. Keep logs of failed deliveries and replace carriers who are repetitively charged with nondelivery
2. If the problem is your inability to get reliable carriers, inform your customers of such
3. Have a text message system for reporting nondelivery that automatically triggers an attempt at redelivery at a supervisory level
4. Failing physical redelivery, in response to the text message reporting nondelivery, send a link to your customer giving access to an electronic version for the day.