Why has the New York Times been so sloppy for so many years?

Because a newspaper has two functions : to inform and to entertain.

Newspapers entertain by telling interesting stories with a writing style that is pleasing to the reader. The better the writing, the more enjoyable the article is to the reader. This has a huge effect on their revenues.

Newspapers inform, by doing backup research so that the journalist can be confident that his work is as truthful, fair , and balanced as he can make it. Articles are more informative if the journalist has done enough backup research so that he can be confident that he knows what he is talking about.

The problem is that such research costs time, and time is money. Being informative and accurate does not boost revenues to the same degree as being entertaining.

This is even more of a problem for the New York Times than other papers, because the NYT has a very prestigious reputation, and they have tended to coast on their reputation over the years.

But still , if Vance just did maybe five more hours of research, JUST A FEW HOURS, he could have written an article on R that was not so untruthful and misleading.

very sloppy, Vance.