>But are we though? I still encounter a non trivial number of people in the real world with objectively wrong ideas about the history of slavery in the US. We all see some of those folks passing laws and talking on national television.
None of these people at this point are going to be reading the NYTimes for its pieces on slavery. So yes, the base that reads the NYTimes should start looking at a wider scope, especially if its slavery still active today.
None of these people at this point are going to be reading the NYTimes for its pieces on slavery. So yes, the base that reads the NYTimes should start looking at a wider scope, especially if its slavery still active today.