Exactly. What is the point of NYTimes running this kind of piece, except to court favor with police unions.
It only serves to cloud the issue, by encouraging people to forget that bodycam video and dashcam video are strictly additive evidence.
A preponderance of the evidence shows that police will do anything they can to suppress information that makes them accountable. Hence dashcam audio that gets disabled, nearby security camera footage that gets deleted, and so on.
Maybe NYTimes is just afraid that they will alienate the police unions if they state the truth: that all law enforcement and the general public alike are protected and constrained by low-cost video recording.