That's not a source.

according to three people briefed on the matter.

This is basically the NYT sourcing the Three Stooges. They can print anything and it matters little whether any of it is true because it's all hearsay pinned on "three anonymous people."

Given the NYT's track record of lies on anonymous sourcing, why would anyone be inclined to believe them?

If I make the statement, "According to a person familiar with the matter at hand, the DOJ is investigating whether the NYT editors kidnapped and raped a black girl in '93." is it a claim to be believed? Why or why not?

That's not a source.

according to three people briefed on the matter.

This is basically the NYT sourcing the Three Stooges. They can print anything and it matters little whether any of it is true because it's all hearsay pinned on "three anonymous people."

Given the NYT's track record of lies on anonymous sourcing, why would anyone be inclined to believe them?

If I make the statement, "According to a person familiar with the matter at hand, the DOJ is investigating whether the NYT editors kidnapped and raped a black girl in '93." is it a claim up be believed? Why or why not?