Some explanation of why they did it:
https://forward.com/forverts-in-english/517577/why-the-new-york-times-translated-its-hasidic-yeshiva-investigation-into-yiddish/
“Our reporting showed that many in the community did not speak English well, and we wanted them to be able to access the story,” LaForgia said."
“More broadly, we thought taking the time to translate it would underscore the reality of what we were doing: beginning a conversation and focusing attention on some of the least powerful members of this community.”
I had read the Forward piece before this comment, and frankly that reasoning doesn't do anything to answer the heart of the question. I replied to the editor of the forward and quote tweeted Eliza Shapiro, didn't get an answer from either, though I wasn't expecting one.
Your ability to give the benefit of the doubt that they want to hear the other side of the story is commendable, but to a point. At what stage do you stop being dan lkaf zchus and start being naive? They worked on this for two years. They interviewed 275 people. They published numerous anecdotes that aren't backed up by data. Which is fine. Having a solid story being backed up by anecdotes is common and they are what keeps a dry story intresting and readable. But where are the anecdotes from pro Yeshivah parents? They couldn't find any? Hundreds of thousands of people wrote comments in support of yeshivas, they couldn't publish one of them?
They went to the Forward to find a Yiddish writer. They could have asked for a Chareidi parent. I've written for the Forward. Many yeshivah parents have.
I got messages from people during the early days of covid asking if I could provide a comment from the Chareidi point of view.
I'm not a media personality or community spokesperson, but people know where to find someone when they need it.
If it was just the Yiddish, fine. If it was just the anecdotes, maybe. But I've posted by now about a dozen clear ways the article was dishonest by outright lies, omission of context, or bad framing. And that list is not even complete!
At a certain point you have to conclude that this was a smear. It was regurgitating the points Yaffed have been pushing for years without looking at them critically or with any level of honesty.
It painted Chassidim as poverty stricken, uneducated, corporal punishment using, alcohol and drug abusing money grubbing scammers stealing government money out of pockets of desperate minorities.