02-16-2018 12:28:03 PM -0800
01-23-2018 09:55:12 AM -0800
01-18-2018 11:02:22 AM -0800
01-09-2018 01:54:15 PM -0800
12-22-2017 09:40:32 AM -0800
It looks like you've previously blocked notifications. If you'd like to receive them, please update your browser permissions.
Desktop Notifications are  | 
Get instant alerts on your desktop.
Turn on desktop notifications?
Remind me later.

Do New York Times Subscribers Have the Morals of an Alley Cat?

It seems so. In the NYTMagazine from 11-12-17,  I read about the results of a study conducted online in June by the New York Time's research-and-analytics  department "reflecting the opinions of 2,903 subscribers who chose to participate":

This week's question:  Would you rather have done a horrible thing that only you know about, or have everyone think you did a horrible thing that you didn't do?

Not surprisingly, 72% of these paragons of morality would rather  "have done a horrible thing that only I know about," while only 28%  of the subscribers  would rather  "have everyone think I did a horrible thing I didn't do."

So, these people would choose to do something horrible as long as no one knows about it rather than be shamed by people for something they did not do. Wow, what are they willing to do, I  wonder? Assault a senator?    Sexually assault others?