Are we to believe the "newspaper of record" has just discovered the tip of the iceberg that will eventually lead them to conclude that the Beltway think tanks are, in part, propaganda mills for the Dems or GOP, or DoS or NATO and the government's corporate sponsors? What next in this brave new world, the NYT discovering it shilled hard for the Iraq invasion of 2003 and is shilling hard for Hillary Clinton in 2016? What other "blurred lines" will this fantastically brave and honorable newspaper pull into focus for the public?
I don't know what's weirder...the article itself or the fact that it's taken at face value by the target audience. Looking at the parts in isolation but never ever zooming out and considering the links and connections between them and the whole it reveals is a sign of these interesting times. Likewise, the earnest and perplexed "study" of various symptoms like, Trump, say, but never ever honestly considering what caused them to appear in the first place.
Is it simple ignorance that drives this insane game of charades or is it something else...like a deep fear of having to face an unbearable truth...a fear so deep that outright self-delusion is preferable to holding power to account. Accepting the consequences of what an honest evaluation of government and corporate power would reveal about where American society is heading...well, that is something the mass media is definitely NOT prepared to do.
Which raises the question of what role exactly is the media playing in all of this? The Times article partially answers that question. When a person or persons repress uncomfortable thoughts and feelings, these will find an indirect outlet, often without the denier being aware that this is happening.