One can agree with the plausibility of a publication's argument in one articule (as I actually do in this case) and still make a general point about the nature and tendencies of the wider publication/media organization behind it. This is an obvious thing, and nitpicking about it is ridiculous. The NY Times has indeed performed many internally, centrally guided ideological contortions to suit its own cynical motives (like many other media sources do) and absolutely deserves being called out on its bullshittery.