I love your writing on this beat. I just wish I could make Sulzberger and other NYT leadership read it. Have you ever had any indication that your work reaches those people? Have you ever heard anything from other folks at the NYT who aren't at the very top?
The New York Times is a huge company -- $2.4 billion in revenue last year, 1,700 staff writers* -- and employs a lot of really great journalists. At that scale it would be hard not to. Sadly, few of them are on the politics beat. Many of those really great journalists don't care for a lot of decisions that are made above their pay grade. That has always been true, and is a statement I'm comfortable making based on both observation/inference and on direct conversations over the years. I said this at the time, but IMO the biggest (by far) factor in James Bennet's ouster was criticism from the rank-and-file of the decision to run the Tom Cotton op-ed. Forcing that change was a testament to the integrity of a lot of journalists and other employees inside the building. But the way it ultimately played out -- Bennet's replacement is no improvement, and the Opinion section remains a mess -- is a reminder that ultimately it's the paper's publisher and top leadership who call the shots and who are the problem.
* according to Wikipedia; I'm not going to look any further because that's probably close enough for these purposes
Does that break down to $2.3 billion derived from and 1,650 staff writers devoted to Cooking, Wordle, Spelling Bee, Connections, and Crosswords? Just wondering.
This is the POS Sulzsberger’s response to long-time NYT subscribers cancelling because they’ve had enough of the ‘gaslighting’, which its imbalanced coverage really is. This hypocrite, who’s put profit ahead of the newspaper’s slogan and done more to support tRump than democracy, now comes pleading that the NYT’s crumbling economic base of support is threatening the democracy he’s been ignoring all along.
Like I told the NYT several months ago when cancelling my subscription to support The Guardian instead, this is why:
I am sure many of the spineless Republicans, who are too afraid to stand up to Trump wish that the New York Times would for them. I cancel my subscription a couple months ago. Although there are a lot of great aspects and writers for the newspaper their political reporting has been a journalistic disgrace.
He is a total hypocrite. When he took over in 2018, he stated he would change the NYT to lean more right. (see his Wiki page for the exact quote). He was insulted that Biden wouldn't do an interview, so he had the paper go after him. Guess that backfired, didn't it? And today, an op-ed by Ross Douthat titled "Why I Still Think Trump Will Win." I no longer subscribe so can't read the essay, but do I really need to? Sulzberger can shove it. We've MOVED ON.
Early in the Trump presidency, shortly after the current editor took over, the tone of the paper seemed much more openly critical of Trump. Gradually, the tone shifted. The criticism that the two papers of record are downplaying Trump’s threat in an effort to appear balanced is fully justified. The Right has multiple outlets actively promoting their narrative of fear mongering and exaggerated claims of impending economic collapse. The Center should be forthright in printing the truth in opposition to those distortions.
Trump is flaming dementia. On top of his incredible stupidity and his sociopathic personality he has full blown dementia. How stupid can people be. If I walked around my neighborhood talking and acting like him, my neighbors would get me institutionalized for my protection.
There have been many articles about the corporate media and their unwillingness to speak truth to power over these last nine years. While there are a myriad of reasons for their incompetence, no one mentions that the Murdoch empire, and particularly Fox News, shoved the theme of “Fair and Balanced” down the throats of so many of us, and when Fox became dominate as a source of news, and profits flowed to them, they lead the charge to incentivize all media to appear fair and balanced. The media fell for it because the profit motive is strong. Of course, that is not the sole reason for the caving of journalistic standards, but it certainly has its place in the blame game!
Thanks for calling out Sulzberger's hypocrisy. I will be citing you tonight in my newsletter. Keep up the good work!
So . . 🤔 Why is the editor ✍️ of Thee NYT unable to publish his opinion in his own paper?
Total. Bullshit. From Sulzberger…hiding behind his rant in another newspaper makes him even worse.
That newspaper may bring Drumpf to office and I do not respect it at all. Thank you for your writing!!!
Sulzberger is late to the party and can fuck all the way off. He owns some of the blame for this mess!!!!
I love your writing on this beat. I just wish I could make Sulzberger and other NYT leadership read it. Have you ever had any indication that your work reaches those people? Have you ever heard anything from other folks at the NYT who aren't at the very top?
The New York Times is a huge company -- $2.4 billion in revenue last year, 1,700 staff writers* -- and employs a lot of really great journalists. At that scale it would be hard not to. Sadly, few of them are on the politics beat. Many of those really great journalists don't care for a lot of decisions that are made above their pay grade. That has always been true, and is a statement I'm comfortable making based on both observation/inference and on direct conversations over the years. I said this at the time, but IMO the biggest (by far) factor in James Bennet's ouster was criticism from the rank-and-file of the decision to run the Tom Cotton op-ed. Forcing that change was a testament to the integrity of a lot of journalists and other employees inside the building. But the way it ultimately played out -- Bennet's replacement is no improvement, and the Opinion section remains a mess -- is a reminder that ultimately it's the paper's publisher and top leadership who call the shots and who are the problem.
* according to Wikipedia; I'm not going to look any further because that's probably close enough for these purposes
Does that break down to $2.3 billion derived from and 1,650 staff writers devoted to Cooking, Wordle, Spelling Bee, Connections, and Crosswords? Just wondering.
Dropped my New York times subscription this week
This is the POS Sulzsberger’s response to long-time NYT subscribers cancelling because they’ve had enough of the ‘gaslighting’, which its imbalanced coverage really is. This hypocrite, who’s put profit ahead of the newspaper’s slogan and done more to support tRump than democracy, now comes pleading that the NYT’s crumbling economic base of support is threatening the democracy he’s been ignoring all along.
Like I told the NYT several months ago when cancelling my subscription to support The Guardian instead, this is why:
https://open.substack.com/pub/jefftiedrich/p/top-new-york-times-editor-defending?r=ufrg9&utm_medium=ios
Guess he had to print it in WaPO in hopes of reaching his long-gone subscribers? Guess what?! Unsubscribed from that one, too!
I am sure many of the spineless Republicans, who are too afraid to stand up to Trump wish that the New York Times would for them. I cancel my subscription a couple months ago. Although there are a lot of great aspects and writers for the newspaper their political reporting has been a journalistic disgrace.
Don't care. Unsubscribed.
It is WILD that he did this, even by his standards.
He is a total hypocrite. When he took over in 2018, he stated he would change the NYT to lean more right. (see his Wiki page for the exact quote). He was insulted that Biden wouldn't do an interview, so he had the paper go after him. Guess that backfired, didn't it? And today, an op-ed by Ross Douthat titled "Why I Still Think Trump Will Win." I no longer subscribe so can't read the essay, but do I really need to? Sulzberger can shove it. We've MOVED ON.
We pray we have moved on…
Take nothing for granted.
Continue to fight.
They don’t get off this easy
Early in the Trump presidency, shortly after the current editor took over, the tone of the paper seemed much more openly critical of Trump. Gradually, the tone shifted. The criticism that the two papers of record are downplaying Trump’s threat in an effort to appear balanced is fully justified. The Right has multiple outlets actively promoting their narrative of fear mongering and exaggerated claims of impending economic collapse. The Center should be forthright in printing the truth in opposition to those distortions.
Oratorical genius - To hell with you NYT. Sanewashing Trump’s sociopathy.
Wanna know who’s an oratorical genius? - Obama, Buttigieg, Newsome, to name a few.
Appreciate the nod
Trump is flaming dementia. On top of his incredible stupidity and his sociopathic personality he has full blown dementia. How stupid can people be. If I walked around my neighborhood talking and acting like him, my neighbors would get me institutionalized for my protection.
There have been many articles about the corporate media and their unwillingness to speak truth to power over these last nine years. While there are a myriad of reasons for their incompetence, no one mentions that the Murdoch empire, and particularly Fox News, shoved the theme of “Fair and Balanced” down the throats of so many of us, and when Fox became dominate as a source of news, and profits flowed to them, they lead the charge to incentivize all media to appear fair and balanced. The media fell for it because the profit motive is strong. Of course, that is not the sole reason for the caving of journalistic standards, but it certainly has its place in the blame game!
Bingo