> The story of Substack, the company, is interesting and, of course, meaningful to its investors. But the shift in power toward individual writers and direct payments has broader implications. And my informal survey of Substack writers found that most are fond of the company and plan to stick around for now — but not out of the sense of loyalty, shared mission or deep identification that used to run through media companies.
What did you see that tells you they 'despise' it?
It doesn't seem like you're asking in good faith. Perhaps the previous poster could have said something like 'in my opinion the NYT editorial line despises...'. A list of articles is a pretty good basis for that sort of opinion.
From what I understand, it's unlikely that a senior NYT editor would explicitly state the paper's opinion on this, which seems to be the proof that you're after, so we're left to extrapolate from their actual publication choices.
I read the articles. No basis for the comment. This is why it would have helped if the OP linked a specific article and perhaps quoted the relevant part.
What isn't in good faith is telling someone "just google it" when they're asked to provide evidence of their claims.
