You're not getting a discount, given that they used to include sports in the coverage. They're making a higher profit...

The New York Times, meanwhile, published a super-snarky story with a headline that is at best grossly misleading (I think it's obviously false given what Semafor reported). The story, with the BS headline, is still there. One label that perpetually, and accurately, applies to the NYT: arrogant.

6/6

Once the error was embarrassingly public, the Times of London did what it had to do: It pulled down the story. Needless to say, as you might expect from an arrogant Murdoch family property, it dumped on the man its reporter mistook for the former mayor, trying to deflect responsibility.
5/6

In any event, contrary to the NY Times' scolding headline and story, the interviewee was NOT an impersonator or imposter -- at least not as most people would understand those words. He wasn't instigating the fraud on readers. The newspaper did that to itself, and its readers.
4/6

Should the not-former-mayor De Blasio (spelled slighly differently from the mayor's name) have warned the London paper's reporter? Arguably. But he figured the paper would do, you know, actual reporting and move on.

3/6