We believe that is one reason it requires public scrutiny and debate. We understand that many readers find Senator Cotton's argument painful, even dangerous. Times opinion editor James Bennet, who is widely seen as a possible successor to Times executive editor Dean Baquet, said on Twitter that “Times Opinion owes it to our readers to show them counter-arguments” and claimed Cotton’s viewpoint required “public scrutiny and debate.” He elaborated further in a Thursday post: “I worry we’d be misleading our readers if we concluded that by ignoring Cotton’s argument we would diminish it.” It was later revealed that Bennet had not read the op-ed before it was published. Sulzberger wrote in a memo to staff Thursday. “I believe in the principle of openness to a range of opinions, even those we may disagree with, and this piece was published in that spirit,” Times publisher A.G. The governors haven't asked for military deployments-in fact, several told Trump it would make things much worse.
it might have been 2 days ago, but Pentagon, and Mattis have been clearly pushing back. This fell far short.”īut the Cotton piece isn't original, or even timely. Sewell Chan, a former New York Times op-ed editor, said the op-ed “falls short of sound journalistic practice,” adding, “The richest, largest and most powerful newspaper in America needs to exercise discretion and prudence in the use of its platform. Times employees received an upswell of support from journalists at other organizations and journalism-adjacent folks. Running a piece that calls on the military to quell a protest against deadly racism is an injury to the newspaper and the colleagues who make me proud every day. PS: yes, I want opinion sections to run op-eds I disagree with.
So it is with love and sadness that I say: running this puts Black staff – and many, many others – in danger. I spent some of the happiest and most productive years of my life working for the New York Times. As a black woman, as a journalist, as an American, I am deeply ashamed that we ran this. I’ll probably get in trouble for this, but to not say something would be immoral. To be clear, this story endangers *all* black people, NYT staffers and not. (Another nugget from Feinberg’s story: According to one Times customer service rep, between 4 and 5 PM ET on Wednesday the paper received 203 editorial cancellations, “the highest hourly total ever in the data we have.”) “It has never been my expectation that every piece the New York Times publishes will confirm my personal worldview,” one employee wrote in a company Slack, “but it was also never my expectation The Times would run an op-ed calling for state violence that uses multiple false and misleading claims to make its argument, and which our own journalists report is impacting their safety and ability to source stories.”Įmployees took “the unusual step of sending a letter to management asking for a number of corrections,” Vanity Fair’s Joe Pompeo reported, “as well as for ‘an editor’s note or follow-up, or, ideally, a fully reported news story’ to ‘examine’ what the letter calls ‘cherry-picked facts woven together with hyperbolic assumptions that were gross exaggerations.'” Slate’s Ashley Feinberg reported that as of midday Thursday the letter had been signed by nearly 500 Times staffers. Several Times employees also took sick days Thursday to protest the op-ed. Times staffers flooded Twitter on Wednesday to protest the op-ed, tweeting “Running this puts Black staff in danger” and “Running this puts Black people, including Black staff, in danger.” In doing so, they chose to violate the Times’ controversial policy that forbids staffers from “taking sides” on social media. NEW: Times spokeswoman sends mea culpa /phBVjA21ATĬotton referred to Black Lives Matter protestors as “rioters,” “looters,” and “insurrectionists,” repeated the false Trump claim ( debunked earlier this week by the Times itself) that “antifa” have infiltrated the marches, and called for “an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers.” Then, on Thursday evening, the Times PR team released a statement saying that Cotton’s op-ed “did not meet our standards.” Times management spent the day defending the op-ed. (Times employees are not the only newsroom staffers protesting this week.) military to quash the people who are protesting the alleged murder of George Floyd, a black man, by a white police officer. June 4, 2020New York Times staffers are banding together in protest after the paper ran an op-ed by Senator Tom Cotton (R-AR) arguing that the United States government should call in the U.S.
0 kommentar(er)
