It's usually the most right of the US papers. The Washington Post is the only other notable US paper nowadays (RIP Wall Street Journal, shit since 2007), and they suffer a serious case of Beltway Bubble along with having an idiotic editorial staff. They do produce some good work, but the NYT is a better paper generally.

The WSJ is generally still okay nowadays, as well. You have your outliers, sure, but it's generally still good. Now about editorial staffs, the NYT's is pretty idiotic too.

Eh, they can be sketchy on foreign policy stuff at times but they tend to be the best on domestic issues. Really depends on the subject. They're not my primary source of news and I haven't read the editorials in a while as I had been busy with my degree, but as a general rule I wouldn't have said they had the worst editorial staff of the major US newspapers. The WSJ is not "generally still okay", the WSJ has the occasional good article and a whole lot of bad ones. On anything to do with economics you can probably assume the opposite of what they're saying is true and their political coverage is abysmal. Financial news that doesn't involve government policy is about the only thing they do consistently okay at. The UK's Financial Times is a better paper to read. That being said, Mother Jones has won my heart as just about the best US publication. Good investigative journalism, a little bid rabid and occasionally polemical but by virtue of being hilariously left wing they're pretty good on the facts. (as we all know, reality has a left wing bias) I'm not really sure which US papers do best on foreign policy and international news, I don't tend to read them for it as you chaps are fairly insular unless you're currently at war or posturing with a country.

[quote]Eh, they can be sketchy on foreign policy stuff at times[/quote]The NYT is generally decent with foreign policy stuff, which is why I was so shocked at this report. They (along with the WSJ) have done a tremendous job of covering the Benghazi incident and the information that has been arising since. [quote]The WSJ is not "generally still okay", the WSJ has the occasional good article and a whole lot of bad ones.[/quote]I usually just read the articles about world news and foreign policy stuff; of which, is generally okay. I don't know a lot about economics, so I don't read those articles. You may be right about that, I don't have enough information to know otherwise. [quote](as we all know, reality has a left wing bias)[/quote]lol [quote]I'm not really sure which US papers do best on foreign policy and international news[/quote]Generally the NYT and the WSJ are best paper-medium for this subject.

No American newspaper does wonderful European coverage, I can say that much. British papers do good American coverage, but if I want to read foreign policy stuff I'd usually read the BBC, Guardian or Telegraph before turning to the NYT. Maybe I'm a snob, but American news doesn't really value foreign policy as highly as it perhaps should as there's little money in it. That or Americans really don't care about Europe. Hard to say. Krugman is one of the highlights of the NYT, has been for years. Shame Nate Silver left, though. Reality does have a left wing bias in terms of domestic policy. ;) Not [i]quite[/i] so clear cut with foreign policy though. I'm a European and big fan of the (admittedly flawed) European project, but human rights, free trade and close ties throughout Europe has led to peace and prosperity, though the Euro and transition to a EU parliament with teeth is proving awkward. Not that this is a left wing vision, per se, but a lot of right-wing parties in Europe are anti-EU and increasingly isolationist. Realist/idealist thought doesn't break down simply into left/right, so it's hard to say something like "this is always right". As a general rule we've gotten further in the 20th and 21st centuries with trade, diplomacy and an open hand than we have with a closed fist. The only truly successful military interventions were where we were wanted and where we ensured the rule of law and a reconciliation process. Colonialism is largely dead, self determination is the international norm and the idea that free trade solves all problems is thankfully dying. (Free trade between equals != unrestricted free trade. That encourages exploitation and poverty.) Throw in evolution and climate change and reality has a distinctly left wing bias. ;)

[quote]That or Americans really don't care about Europe.[/quote]It's mostly this, to be honest. I don't agree that reality has a left-wing bias in terms of foreign policy, but I can see in terms of social issues that it most certainly does. However, this is heavily getting away from the subject at hand.

Left wing politics doesn't have a single view on foreign policy and more than right wing politics does. The subject at hand seems fairly clear cut - the NYT are probably wrong and will either need to print a retraction or provide information to support their position.