Why you shouldn’t read the NY Times for oil market information
Earlier this week, one of the lead economic correspondents from the New York Times tweeted a story from the NYT with the headline “US Economy is Better Prepared for
One piece is filed under energy markets, and it is a complaint about sourcing: why a general newspaper is the wrong place to read about crude oil, and what a trader looks at instead. The argument is about the distance between a price quoted in a headline and the contract that price belongs to — the same distance that turns up whenever a reader compares a fund’s return with the chart of spot oil.
That subject is now a standing one in the portal’s markets and energy section, which takes apart the roll schedule of a futures-based fund, negative midday power prices and the way a settlement is actually struck. The archive entry below stays where the column put it, unedited, because the address is older than the portal and still receives traffic of its own.
The complaint the piece makes about sourcing is easier to test now than it was when it was written: fund disclosures, exchange settlement notices and day-ahead auction results are all published on fixed schedules and free to read. That is the method the portal’s energy material uses, and it is the reason this heading has a successor at all. The entry below keeps the author’s wording, including the parts a later reader would argue with, because an archive that edits its own arguments has stopped being one.

Earlier this week, one of the lead economic correspondents from the New York Times tweeted a story from the NYT with the headline “US Economy is Better Prepared for