Re New York Times.

Bowden seems to think that just mentioning subscriber numbers is decisive. Why isn't explained or even canvassed. NYT is a shadow of its former self.
Two examples: RussiaGate. The NYT was at the forefront of pushing the Steele Dossier and ancillary RussiaGate stories. It even won Pulitzers for its coverage. Yet the whole thing was a hoax, fabrication, made up out of whole clothe. Even the NYT has sorta, kinda owned up to that. OTOH the fact that it refuses to return the Pulitzers shows that it retains some of its former attributes given that it has also refused to return the Duranty pulitzer (http://holodomormuseum.org.ua/en/news/denial-of-the-holodomor-genocide-by-pulitzer-prize-winners-walter-duranty-and-anne-applebaum/)

Hospital bombing in Gaza. The NYT was among the first to assert that the hospital was destroyed by Israel. It was among the last to admit that wasn't true and still refuses to fully report that it was done by a failed Hamas rocket.

Re CNN: while Bowden races to tell us about the NYT subscribership, not a word is mentioned about CNN's dismal numbers. CNN is out-polled by Fox 3 to 1 which by Bowden's criteria means Fox is much more reliable than CNN.

There's so much wrong with the Bowden article a mere 350 words won't touch the sides. Basically he quotes from or refers to every anti-Trump organisation in the US and assumes that their claims are 100% valid.

eg "Second. Trump is a war monger."

Trump is one of the few presidents in the last century who DIDN'T start even one war. He ended a few and sought to extract the US from others but never started one. Yet the TDS crowd can't see the illogicality of their warmonger claims. Its beyond belief.

But ultimately the problem for Bowden is his inability to see past his own prejudices. He thinks he's progressive and the only way to be progressive is his way. He doesn't understand that others including Trump and Young seek change but not the change the people who preen themselves as left leaning progressives want

In regards to Peter Bowden's objection to conservatives using the word "progress" here is some history on it's use...

Progress Associations-
Some associations initiated the building of progress halls and community centres to create community focal points for meetings and activities, and generally to enhance civic pride.

https://www.emelbourne.net.au/biogs/EM01198b.htm

Harvard Business Review- The Power Of Progress

https://hbr.org/2011/08/the-power-of-progress

Sometimes the word "development" is used instead of the word "progress"- as in Development Association. It seems to refer to commerce and economic progress that promotes community involvement. Progressive on the other hand seems to relate more to socialism (or social democracy).