Just turn off the lights. The brains there are just cooked.

Stupid “critics”. Who cares what you say?

Like he's not exhausting enough! We have to put up with this bullshit too?! JFC!

The sign back there said "Bridge Out". Should I be concerned?

but "loser nerds" instead of "critics" messes up the typography, you can see the conundrum

"Democracy nerds are getting all worked up." -NYT

Changed from Jerks See Risks.

No way to know if destroying the CDC is good or bad.

They can’t help themselves

When AI Writes Headlines By Scott Galloway

At this point The Times is committing journalistic malpractice and major ethics violations.

“Were journalists! It’s not our job to actually criticize anything.”

Ahhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!

Some people are saying it’s big and risky

We assembled a panel of 9 authoritarianism fans and one guy who seemed like a real negative nellie.

Sulzbergers see big opportunity. bsky.app/profile/nytp...

I’m so sorry pitchbot.

Yep. “Critics See Risks,” but the New York Times hasn’t come to a conclusion yet.

But they're concerned.

The big media outlets won't acknowledge it's raining until the storm is over.

The Times came to a conclusion long ago. They are all in for Trump.

No, it’s so much worse than that. The @nytimes.com and other traditional media outlets are going to sacrifice us all on the Altar of Objectivity.

"Critics", oh like they always do. Who cares! They always see risks! Pay no mind.

"Oh, those critics, always criticizing!" -NYT It's the moral equivalent to "So my friends say you're an asshole."

The critics, they come to me with tears in their eyes, they say Sir, nobody’s ever seen anything like these risks

Authoritarianism is a Risky Business

Others see big opportunities.

The final headline, from the last NY Times reporter: Trump sends Me to a reeducation camp. Here’s why that’s bad for Joe Biden.

“legally untested”, i.e. illegal. As Susan Collins put it, “Any effort to rescind appropriated funds without congressional approval is a clear violation of the law.”

They're just nattering nabobs of negatavism.

All is ash and dust, the poison fire has swept away all the works and lives of men. What does this mean for the stock market?

We're just a simple country newspaper. Who are we to say if anything is bad?

Ladies and gentlemen of the jury, I'm merely a caveman...

Pitchbot totally stymied.

Still undefeated!

Pesky critics

We all see big risks, so they're not wrong I guess.

I’m surprised they used “critics” and not “cranks”

Oh those 'critics'...what do they know? So critical. They need to clap more.

Unbelievable

Pitchbot perfect.

This ones a keeper. Thermonuclear view from nowhereism.

Allies see risks, stay silent or attack those who point them out. Privately gripe and hope someone else will solve them.

seems nyt admits it isn't a critic.

Big risks, high rewards.

My mother always taught me not to be a critic and always see the positive side of things. A denialist approach she learned unconsciously as a child from having to cope with an alcoholic father…….

It's certainly an unorthodox approach that is dividing Americans.

They are pathetic

Can’t top that.

Think of it as a pre-written Pitchbot

"Trump Orders Mass Executions of Democrats. Critics See Murder."

This Trump guy sounds bold and visionary.

Critics say Hitler’s invasion of Poland an unjustified act of aggression

Not "normal people", just "critics". I am so tired of this shit

Trump could shoot a golden retriever puppy on camera while saying “I love killing puppies” and the Times would put it on A16 with the headline “Trump personally involved in animal control, critics say putting down dangerous pets is wrong.”

Understated, as all NYT Trump criticism seems to be. Sleepwalking into the apocalypse.

But only critics.

How observant.

Actually, the NYTimes style would be to use the passive voice: "Big risks are seen by critics."

and remove the verb: "Big Risks Seen By Critics"

Critics see big risks = law experts say it's illegal

They would never! Some claim that it is against the law, others disagree. The some who claim it is against the law are constitutional law scholars, the others are cranks, but you know there is no difference.

“legally untested maneuver” The article quotes Susan Collins saying that it’s clearly illegal.

Critics.

Critics be criticizin'n shit.

Critics See Obsequious Oligarchs Where Journalists Used To Be

Update: Trump promises crackdown on big risks

critics are the worst

Sycophants, however, see only smooth sailing ahead.

Covid, measles, stagflation, unemployment, military occupation. What's not to like?

The fecklessness of @nytimes is despicable. Never forget that two weeks before he started WWII, that wonderful publication did a puff piece on Hitler's mountain retreat. www.nytimes.com/1939/08/20/a...

Just continuing their noble tradition...

If critics are saying big risks, then we know, we may be seeing big risks. Such courage of convictions !!

Ugh

The New York Times : a bunch of motherfucking motherfucks.

Golly! Sounds bad!

It’s just impossible to beat.

They're literally putting you out of work.

It’s all fun and games until satire becomes reality.

Night of the long knives: A risky move that some say just might pay off

But not the Times. It just sees a story.

Critics would

/goose What does 'targets' mean? /angrygoose What do you mean by 'targets'!?!

I did it by the way; canceled my subscription over the weekend.

Who is anyone anyway

Critics. Whaddarya gonna do, amirite?