> I once read the New York Times from 1917 to 1922 on microfilm
You read ~1800 newspapers from 100 years ago?
Anyway, can you provide a basis that substantiates any claim in the parent? I don't mean one link to one article, which tells us nothing about an overall trend. Ironically, there is nothing like HN for unsubstantiated claims about Russia like the parent, which are ceaseless.
This was not the case when I did this thirty years ago.
> You read ~1800 newspapers from 100 years ago?
I concur with your observation that if you stop reading that sentence after the first few words, it makes less sense than if you read the whole sentence.
> Anyway, can you provide a basis that substantiates any claim in the parent?
I already did.
> I don't mean one link to one article
August 13, 1918 NY Times front page - article headline "Red leaders flee, reach Kronstadt, entire Bolshevist government escaping from Moscow". Of course history shows us that the Bolshevist government did not collapse in August 1918.
> there is nothing like HN for unsubstantiated claims about Russia like the parent, which are ceaseless
I have received ceaseless upvotes for my comments on the lies the Times has told about Russia over the past century, and I wish to thank the товарищи who gave them to me - from wherever they are in the world.
That doesn't establish anything in the original claim. First, the quote says the government left Moscow; it didn't say the government collapsed permanently. Similarly, saying De Gaulle fled France doesn't say that France's free government had collapsed permanently. It would have been false to say Mao and the Chinese Communists didn't flee to northwest China (the Long March); should the newspaper have reported that they were in Beijing? Are you saying the Bolshevik government didn't leave Moscow? Can you provide a basis for that? Second, it's just one headline and you had claimed a trend that lasted for years; one headline, even if mistaken, is not a sign of bias; nobody would say that newspapers are perfect and errors happen for many reasons. Finally, it's from a century ago; I don't see what it says about anything current; does the Russian government of 100 years ago tell us about the current organization? Does IBM of 100 years ago tell us how the current organization functions?