In this episode of "The Legacy Media Is ON IT!"...

The New York Times -- "The Grey Lady" as it were -- was once America's "newspaper of record," meaning it was the national newspaper generally considered to be highly authoritative and trustworthy due to its rigorous reporting and comprehensive coverage of national and international news. 

That ship sailed long ago, yet the venerable paper retains its "All the News That's Fit to Print" motto.

Welp, Wednesday's edition of the Times included an article titled "A Hot Accessory, at the Intersection of Faith and Culture," in which reporter Misty White Sidell, who covers shopping and fashion trends -- yeah -- for the paper, reported on her realization that some Christians not only wear crosses around their necks; but also they wear their crosses... wait for it... in public! Oh, the humanity!

My first question is why wasn't this "BREAKING" news across the legacy media? Perhaps Sidell, being the super sleuth she is, scooped the story before other outlets got to it. 

ALSO CHECK OUT: Gen Z Is Getting Good With God

Compare and Contrast: Biden's 'Transgender Day of Visibility' Easter to Trump's Faith-Focused One

As one might expect, the Times article was mercilessly mocked on social media. We'll get there -- but let's first take a gander at a bit of Sidell's musings, some of which are amusing, unintentionally so:

When Arianna Salerno first moved to Washington, D.C., in 2022 to attend Catholic University she didn’t see many people wearing cross necklaces. But in the past year, she says she has noticed an uptick of the jewelry each time she takes the Metro, and they are now a regular presence on Capitol Hill, where she’s held multiple internships.

[...]

On red carpets, on social media, at protests by high-ranking Democrats and in the White House, necklaces with cross pendants are appearing with renewed prevalence. ... Lately, the cross necklaces flash across cable news screens several times a week, suspended between the collarbones of Karoline Leavitt, the White House press secretary, and Attorney General Pam Bondi.

Let's stop for a couple of observations. 

The author's use of the word "jewelry" to describe cross necklaces, while technically true, isn't the reason many or most Christians wear them. To that point, Pam Bondi wrote in a statement that her cross necklaces are an expression of her “strong Christian” upbringing, adding: 

My faith is very important to me. It is what gets me through each day.

Sidell included other examples of Christian women sharing thoughts on why they wear crosses.

Across TikTok, young Christian women have been sharing the meaning behind their own cross necklaces, saying they help cultivate a sense of belonging and connection with others.

Sage Mills, a student at the University of Oklahoma who has posted videos about her cross necklace, said that seeing women in government like Ms. Leavitt and Ms. Bondi wear their own “makes me feel good. It makes me feel like God is the important thing for people that are governing our world.”

Nicely and correctly reported -- to that point. But Sidell also touched on House Minority Leader Hakeem Jeffries (D-NY), who's lately been seen sporting a large cross around his neck.

The wearable religious symbol has popped up elsewhere in government. This weekend, Representative Hakeem Jeffries of New York, the top House Democrat, wore a large silvertone cross pendant necklace to stage a sit-in protest against the GOP budget on the steps of the Capitol with Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey.

While I will neither comment on the veracity of Mr. Jeffries's faith nor is it my place to do so, I will point out that virtual signaling is among the favorite choices in the Democrat Party's bag of tricks. And don't even get me started on New Jersey Democrat Rep. Cory "Spartacus" Booker and his monotonous political stunts. 

Social Media Weighs In

Mary Katherine Ham, conservative political commentator and writer for The Federalist, was among those who skewered the Times on social media.

This is real. People wear crosses and the NYT is ON IT.

Again, Mary Katherine, all the news that's fit to print.

This is real. People wear crosses and the NYT is ON IT. pic.twitter.com/osznDYYAms

— Mary Katharine Ham (@mkhammer) April 30, 2025

Charles W. Cooke, senior writer for National Review Online, put the ridiculous article into perspective.

The fact that this piece got through the Times's editorial process without anyone saying, 'um ... guys?' shows exactly why the press always seems so clueless about the country it is supposed to cover.

Priorities, Charles -- priorities!

The fact that this piece got through the Times's editorial process without anyone saying, "um . . . guys?" shows exactly why the press always seems so clueless about the country it is supposed to cover. https://t.co/qFtUhNWYiQ https://t.co/EwVX5VEt6t

— Charles C. W. Cooke (@charlescwcooke) April 30, 2025

Tom Bevan, co-founder and CEO of RealClearPolitics, made an excellent point:

The author probably doesn't know a single person who wears one, which is why it's treated as a novelty.

Exactly. Why else would not only the author, but New York Times editors as well, think that the absurd article fell into the "all the news that's fit to print" category? 

Finally, Charles C. Camosy, an associate professor of theological and social ethics at Fordham University, put the cherry atop the laughable sundae.

In certain bizarrely isolated contexts, public displays of religiosity (even something as common as cross necklaces) are so *uncommon* that they become successful pitches for New York Times stories.

As I was finishing up this article, I thought about the awesome report in The New York Times about left-wing radicals sporting swastika tattoos or even necklaces. Remember that one? Me, neither.