Several billion masks are now shedding microplastics into the ocean for centuries. Kids are developmentally delayed. Nice job, NYT!

Expand full comment

This is most likely damage control. The WEF has declared this year's priority is "rebuilding trust," and NYT is doing its part. But admitting now that masks did not work cannot possibly contribute to greater trust, and not just because NYT is irrevocably loathed as fake news by a huge silent majority. Admitting now that masks did not work when then NYT was pushing mask mandates to the max can only tank trust even further. They can say the NYT should have known then, but was ignorant of what we know now. But NYT should have known then, if it claimed the role of "expert" and purveyor of truth. Thing is, the NYT Did know then, but pushed its mask mandate madness anyway. And people know that now. The credibility of NYT is in the toilet, and trying to come clean now is going to make its reputation worse. Many are never going to trust NYT ever again--nor the CDC, WHO, NIH, FDA, Big Pharma, and the entirety of the establishment. Attempts at damage control only inflict more damage, on themselves this time.

Expand full comment

A semi-lukewarm (not quite hot-) take on this'un is that the NY Slimes put this "opinion" piece out there ONLY so it would be excoriated in the "com-mints" by the Blue Branch Covidians --an' boy golly did they ever do it. Ugh. If you wanna feel the need ta call fer Dramamine or the "courtesy" bag from the Stewardess, by all means take a look-see at 'em--it's like Jiffy Pop fer yer eyeballs cuz any sane person readin' this stuff would think the entire readership has gone insane!.

The self-righteous "common-tards" (like about 4000 of 'em with nearly consistent -up-pinions seemed carefully positioned to near-universally rip poor Bret Stephens ta shreds (the Woke ol' Gray Lady bein' a NASTY HAG 've late). Mean ain't the word for it--so bad I wunder if these comments WERE AI...?

So they claimed he (Stephens) wasn't an ex-spurt (...lackin' a dok-turd's degree cuz, gee only dok-turds can opine on masks and only bio-logists kin define whatta woman might be...). Right. They actually an' literally wrote that Bret S. has BLOOD on his hands just fer suggestin folks take off their masks--this "un-psy-entiffic "denier" (oy) who will now cause gully-bull readers to RISK their lives an' that 've others by removing masks their live-givin' "safety masks" in public (gawd ferbid...) Some said that they wish Bret Stephens botched SURGERY where the dok-turds go maskless an' BREATHE ON HIM givin' him an infection (yup, this was an actual comm-mint). Others said that this dangerous advice was, after all, an opinion piece--just "dumb" conjecture--ignorin' of course that the arty-cull referred to TEN peer-re-viewed studies showin' masks didn't work / didn't do diddly squat . Some said well of COURSE masks don't work if folks don't wear 'em and are not compliant enough--an' they won't be COMPLIANT ENUF with fools like Bret Stephens suggesting they remove their dang masks--encouragin' non-compliance! (Some crime, right?) They (the pund-dits) asserted the solution was to get folks to be FAR MORE compliant, not less so. Oh Misss---Misss-- I NEED that bag, quick! Some even said Stephens was wrong to criticize Chyyyyyna--CCP DID show the way... Gabba Gabba Gong Hei...

So one small opinion piece and nearly 4K comments in near-uni-versal LOCK STEP cheerin' masks and vilifyin' the writer. Shakin' my head.... if this wasn't a back-handed setup, I'll eat my tin foil hat!

Expand full comment