The New York Times gets mocked over its ‘two-ingredient potato recipe’ that has FOUR ingredients, but no butter.

  • The New York Times published a recipe from two years ago for “Two Ingredient Mashed Potatoes” on Wednesday
  • The illustration shows the four components of this recipe: salt, pepper, cream and sour milk.
  • Users of Twitter have criticized the Times’ inability to accurately count
  • Some have called this recipe an abomination due to the lack of butter. However, reviewers say that they are delicious.










Twitter users are mocking the New York Times for sharing a recipe for ‘Two-Ingredient Mashed Potatoes’ — which, they point out, actually require four ingredeitns.

The recipe, which was first shared by the Times two years ago, calls for two pounds of russet potatoes, a quarter cup of sour cream, salt, and pepper — though by the Times’ calculations, salt and pepper don’t seem to count as ingredients.

On Wednesday, the publication posted a picture of the recipe to Twitter. It has been met with hundreds upon hundreds of criticisms.

Tater time: The New York Times tweeted a two-year-old recipe for 'Two-Ingredient Mashed Potatoes' on Wednesday (stock photo)

Tater time

How to: They included an illustration that shows it uses four ingredients: potatoes, sour cream, salt, and pepper

How to: They included an illustration that shows it uses four ingredients: potatoes, sour cream, salt, and pepper

According to the Times, ‘These mashed potato may be one of the most simple Thanksgiving sides there is’.

The graphic included an illustration and the list of ingredients as well as directions.

The times tweeted similar recipes yesterday for Make-Ahead Gravy, Easy Brussels Sprouts and other Thanksgiving dishes. But the mashed potatoes stole the show.

“This recipe has four ingredients.” One commenter said, “This is also an abomination.”

 ‘Literally four ingredients,’ wrote antother.

‘That looks to be about 4 ingredients,’ said a third, while a fourth wrote: ‘Good grief there are four ingredients pictured.’ 

One, two, three, four (and five?)! Twitter users have called out the Times for its failure to count accurately

1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 15? Users of Twitter have criticized the Times’ inability to accurately count

Another argued that “Y’all who say there are 4 ingredients but don’t pay respect to water”

One more called it the ‘most creative interpretation of “two.”’

Some seemed less bothered by the unusual definition of the term “two”, but were much more offended that someone would make mashed potatoes with no butter. 

“This is SWILL. What about butter? One wrote: “Nonsense,” while another said: “No butter, you heathens ???’

‘If there’s no butter no way,’ someone else snapped. 

One more said, “Missing most important ingredient: Lots of butter.”

Divisive: Others have called the recipe 'an abomination' due to its lack of butter, though reviewers on the site say they're 'delicious'

Divisive: Some have criticised the recipe as a ‘bomb’ because it lacks butter. However, reviewers of the website say that they are ‘delicious.

Some were dissatisfied with the entire thing.

Tweeted by WPDE ABC15 Sydney Madison: “I love to cook… and eat… but this FIVE ingredient recipe [is] an abomination… and disrespectful to foodies all over @NYTimes. You are uninvited to my Thanksgiving.”

‘If this recipe is for you, you’re never invited to my house,’ echoed Ian David Monroe.

The majority of comments from people who tried this recipe were negative, but one comment was positive: “These are the most delicious mashed potatoes that I have ever eaten or cooked!”

“I loved these. Mashed potato perfection! “Easy and delicious,” said another reviewer. 

Advertisement