There are editors at The New York Times who are not happy with me and to whom I am persona non grata. I suspect that one or two have even placed my e-mail address on their spam list. These are people who are thin skinned and sensitive to criticism. The Times, you understand, is above criticism. The same scrutiny with which the Times views subjects it covers should not apply to the newspaper itself, these editors believe.

I acknowledge I have been critical of the Times at times, though not so much that it warrants the editors’ reaction. I could be far more critical. I have, for example, refrained from criticizing the Times’ non-existent baseball coverage. If anyone wants find out what’s happening behind the scenes and off the field, he or she has to look elsewhere.

The Times would rather cover soccer, rugby, lacrosse, cricket, avalanches, snowboarding and rodeos than give its readers baseball news that once occupied its pages.

If baseball news manages to slip in to the sports section, the article usually is attributed to another publication or website. The Times shifted its emphasis to other sports in a desperate attempt to attract new and younger readers to a failing newspaper. But the Times used to do pretty well without Red Smith and Dave Anderson writing about soccer and cricket.

The Times, to be sure, isn’t the only newspaper that invites scrutiny and criticism. I consider myself an equal opportunity critic, which brings me to the New York Daily News. I bring up the Daily News because I recently received an e-mail from a reader, Sara from Manhattan, who asked a question about the News and the Mets:

“As a reader of the New York papers, I am always amazed (it’s Amazin) how the Daily News always puts a positive spin on everything Mets. Never read them knocking the Wilpons (and always quick to trash other owners who have actually had winning teams like Dolan and Rangers, Steinbrenner and Yankees) Rarely knock Mets players or Alderson. Positive headlines even when losing. The News is quick to knock and embarrass all the other New York teams. It’s so obvious and transparent.

“So I deduced it must be that the News staff works for the Wilpons’ TV station. I see this as a major conflict of interest. It’s not just occasional appearances. They’re on all the time and the News website features an SNY video window front and center. And their sports TV critic (Raissman) is a paid daily panelist!

“Then trolling around the internet, I found this:http://www.soct.org/calendar/22nd-annual-mike-lupicajeff-wilpon-golf-invitational-presented-webster-bank/

“From what I can see around the web, Lupica and Wilpon are Connecticut neighbors and buddies for decades. They’re in business together, producing golf tournaments together! I’m guessing that Lupica set up the News-Wilpon TV partnership.

“Why is there no full disclosure statements on the News stories and pages? Where are all the media watchdog publications and websites on this ethics and journalism conflict? I never see anything written anywhere about what I would think is the most blatant conflict of interest I can recall in New York sports coverage.

“I salute you for your keen observation and recognition of a circumstance that has long existed but ignored,” I replied. “I believe you have found the answer to the primary question. I believe the Lupica-Wilpon relationship is at the core of the condition….

“Why do no other publications write about this? Newspapers don’t criticize other newspapers because they don’t want other newspapers criticizing them. You’d think the NY Post, the News’ biggest competitor, would delve into this matter, but the Post has too many issues the News could cite in retaliation.”

Sara then responded:

“But even watchdog websites like the Big Lead or Deadspin, magazines, radio and TV mouths never really address it. I’m stunned. Is it possible they just can’t see the relationship and don’t know? Can’t believe it. And the News knocks the Post all the time. And the Wilpons paying News writers to staff their TV station? That’s a blatant, obvious ethics violation.”

Sara wrote once more, this time regarding an article that appeared in the News:

“I thought this was hilarious, knowing the News is in bed with the Wilpons. They printed their usual defense of the Wilpons, this time on the security cutback story. See below. They show a picture of a cop in front of the stadium. Is that objective reporting or what?? Is it true al Qaeda and ISIS are getting season tickets to Mets games this season? If 50 Cent appears again, duck (there was a big fight that night at Citi)!”

This was the article Sara referred to:

Mets deny security cuts at Citi Field

VIERA, Fla. — The Mets are pushing back against a report claiming that the team reduced security at Citi Field due to budget cuts.

DNAinfo, citing “internal documents,” reported Thursday that the team dramatically cut stadium security – by as much as 29% — from 2009-13, as the team became mired in financial issues and the Bernie Madoff lawsuit.

In a statement, the Mets said, “There are numerous inaccuracies as to what’s been reported. While the details of our security are by their very nature confidential, the security of all who enter Citi Field is a top priority.”

The Mets did not specify what elements of the story were inaccurate.

If a relationship between a columnist, Mike Lupica, and Jeff Wilpon, the Mets’ chief operating officer, creates a questionable newspaper practice, consider the practice of a newspaper allowing an author to write an article praising the book he has written. And in the context of the relationship between the News and the Mets, the practice becomes even more bizarre.

The article in question, a blatant advertisement on the news pages, appeared on the News’ website last Saturday under the byline of the author, Steve Kettmann, and this headline:

Sandy Alderson writer stands by his story: The Mets Are Back!

An absolute shocker – an author standing by his story. The article would have been better had it reflected an article that said the author denied his story.

“Yes, the Mets are revived,” the article begins. “That’s my claim on the cover of my new book ‘Baseball Maverick: How Sandy Alderson Revolutionized Baseball and Revived the Mets,’ and I stand by it 100%: The Mets are relevant again, they’re exciting — and it’s time to circle Matt Harvey Day on the calendar.”

I have not heard from Sara about this example of the relationship between the Mets and the Daily News, but I’m pretty sure I know what she thinks.