4 ms·

Hello - former NYT employee here, who would have been part of the Guild union if I worked there still. The story is written by a reporter, Katie Robertson, who

Hello - former NYT employee here, who would have been part of the Guild union if I worked there still. The story is written by a reporter, Katie Robertson, who is also part of their own union (Times Guild). The Times has been pretty good at covering itself imho.

lolinder 2y ago
> who is also part of their own union (Times Guild). This doesn't remove the conflict of interest because it's not the same union. Those in the other unions may well be more sympathetic to the company than to the strikers, especially given the timing of the strike. It's likely interfering with their jobs right now in pursuit of a negotiation that they don't stand to gain from.
- Wowfunhappy 2y ago
  If we used the Wall Street Journal, they'd also have a conflict interest, because their company competes with the New York Times. I really think this is silly. If there is anything specific you don't think the New York Times article is presenting fairly, please share that.
- donohoe 2y ago
  So maybe I mis-read but... The comment I was replying to suggests the reporter is pro-NYT but you are suggesting that the reporter is pro-Union? Maybe the reporter did a great job after all :)
  - lolinder 2y ago
    Nope, I'm saying that them being part of an unrelated union does not change the fact that they have a conflict of interest in reporting here.
bb611 2y ago
NYT's political coverage has been extremely poor this year, with very obvious editorial control preventing negative coverage of Trump. It's not obvious to me they have a bias here, but given the clear systemic issues in other reporting it's reasonable to bring a skeptical view to their own reporting.
- donohoe 2y ago
  Yeah, it get why its not obvious. That is why I was weighing in. Nothing more.
xdennis 2y ago
> former NYT employee here > The Times has been pretty good and covering itself imho. This is silly. It's like the people who say that the Bible is true because the Bible says the Bible is true.
- dowager_dan99 2y ago
  I don't get this read, or your analogy really. Seems more like "former bible editor here; the author of the psalm about bible editor unions is also a member of a bible editor's union, so is probably not super anti-union. They're unlikely to be just presenting the pope's narrative." Like I said, I don't get your analogy.

lolinder 2y ago

> who is also part of their own union (Times Guild). This doesn't remove the conflict of interest because it's not the same union. Those in the other unions may well be more sympathetic to the company than to the strikers, especially given the timing of the strike. It's likely interfering with their jobs right now in pursuit of a negotiation that they don't stand to gain from.

Wowfunhappy 2y ago
If we used the Wall Street Journal, they'd also have a conflict interest, because their company competes with the New York Times. I really think this is silly. If there is anything specific you don't think the New York Times article is presenting fairly, please share that.
donohoe 2y ago
So maybe I mis-read but... The comment I was replying to suggests the reporter is pro-NYT but you are suggesting that the reporter is pro-Union? Maybe the reporter did a great job after all :)
- lolinder 2y ago
  Nope, I'm saying that them being part of an unrelated union does not change the fact that they have a conflict of interest in reporting here.

bb611 2y ago

NYT's political coverage has been extremely poor this year, with very obvious editorial control preventing negative coverage of Trump. It's not obvious to me they have a bias here, but given the clear systemic issues in other reporting it's reasonable to bring a skeptical view to their own reporting.

donohoe 2y ago
Yeah, it get why its not obvious. That is why I was weighing in. Nothing more.

xdennis 2y ago

> former NYT employee here > The Times has been pretty good and covering itself imho. This is silly. It's like the people who say that the Bible is true because the Bible says the Bible is true.

dowager_dan99 2y ago
I don't get this read, or your analogy really. Seems more like "former bible editor here; the author of the psalm about bible editor unions is also a member of a bible editor's union, so is probably not super anti-union. They're unlikely to be just presenting the pope's narrative." Like I said, I don't get your analogy.