ALEX BERENSON: The New York Times “investigates” the DC jet crash – and buries the truth it finds.

The most important question here is the one the Times never found the time or space to ask in its 4,000-word investigation: why [Chief Warrant Officer Andrew Loyd] Eaves didn’t act more aggressively? Did he fear annoying or angering [Black Hawk pilot Capt. Rebecca] Lobach, who outranked him?

The fact that Lobach’s errors were clearly responsible for the accident raise another set of uncomfortable questions the Times also didn’t ask: Had Lobach ever had any other problems flying? How was she chosen to be trained for this mission, involving a night flight along the Potomac in airspace crowded with civilian jets?

The article is a perfect example of why so many people now distrust the legacy media. Nothing the Times wrote is untrue, and yet the story the paper offered is recognizably false, as false as “mostly peaceful rioting” or “cheap fake Biden videos” or “flatten the curve.”

Even after the disasters of the last few years, the Times and its peers can’t figure out how to course correct.

The good news is that the legacy media no longer controls what people read or see. When I saw that piece yesterday, I posted a 280-character critique to X.

That simple post has now been viewed more than 6.4 million times and received more than 1,200 comments. It has also sparked a wave of similar posts and quote-posts that have been seen many millions of times more.

Collectively, the comments have no doubt drawn far more viewers than the original article. They’ve rewritten the politically palatable narrative the Times prefers in real time. And they’ve brought the world closer to the truth, painful as it might be.

When will the Times learn it can’t play these games anymore?

Considering that virtually the entire DNC-MSM is currently pretending that they couldn’t see Biden’s precipitous mental decline over the last five years, I wouldn’t hold my breath waiting for the industry to change or reform itself.