[gamepsys]

This could be a blueprint for how other tech departments unionize, but I suspect NYT is a unique case because of their politics. Can such a left wing cornerstone really afford to look anti-union inside their own house? This gives the workers more leverage than they would otherwise have in other companies.

In any of the places I worked at in the past an anti-union consulting firm would have been called in to bust things up before it ever got this far.

[mint2]

Regardless of what infographic makers declare, the NYT newsroom is not “left” leaning.

Their coverage is much more complicated than left vs right, but one theme is they don’t question the loudest narratives, and they hold grudges when they perceive someone to not give them enough access.

The right tends to be louder and more uniform and persistent in messaging, so that coloring often gets unconsciously added to articles rather than the journalists taking a step back and analyzing the whole picture.

It’s the quick/lazy way to write stories after all, and journalists have deadlines. The author may be left leaning and some of that may even show, but a little left leaning flavor doesn’t mask that it’s based on the right’s take.

The choice of coverage also is very herd like, not left or right.

The NYT also goes out of the way to appear fair and balanced, trying to find the “average” in stories. But as anyone but the NYT knows, averages are skewed easily.

[thegrim33]

Well here's a challenge for you, we can easily put your viewpoint to the test:

Go on the NYT website right now and find me a single article currently on the front page that's negative about leftist policies or politicians, or a single article that's positive about rightist policies or politicians.

I bet you can't find any.

Repeat this experiment, any minute, any hour, any day, any year, for the last 10 years, and you will get the same exact results.

[segasaturn]

It's not left vs. right, it's establishment vs. anti-establishment. New York Times was a major cheerleader for the illegal US invasion of Iraq in 2003 and uncritically repeated falsehoods from George W. Bush, who is not exactly a leftist hero.

[DinoDad13]

Any reasonably fair news coverage is considered left wing now-a-days.

[dopylitty]

NYT is a pretty solidly right wing organization (eg [1] and [2]) like most for profit media outfits in the US. I suspect they’ll react like any other for profit business. Previous leaks have shown this to be the case [0][3]

0:https://www.theguardian.com/media/2022/feb/01/leaked-message...

1: https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/news-brief-boudin-recall-...

2:https://citationsneeded.libsyn.com/news-brief-the-battle-ove...

3:https://actionnetwork.org/letters/new-york-times-stop-union-...

[smaudet]

> an anti-union consulting firm

Hmm. Maybe an anti-anti-union consulting firm is a business opportunity?

[diggan]

Or, we can use what worked in the past without involving for-profit enterprises: grassroots movements

Easier to align people when you remove the whole troublesome "money" part. Question is how to motivate Americans to work together if not for money?

[thaumasiotes]

Who would be purchasing its services?

The only obvious customer would be a union, and they already provide that service themselves.

[bee_rider]

Unions sometimes hire on third party organizations to help them organize, I don’t think they are specifically specialized against anti-union consulting firms, but I bet that’s part of it.

[neaden]

"Can such a left wing cornerstone really afford to look anti-union inside their own house?" - The NYTimes isn't left wing and being anti-union is entirely within their wheelhouse. Now they won't come out and say "We don't like unions" all their issues will of course be why this specific union isn't a good idea at this specific time, but they'd never willingly accept a union unless they really don't think they have a choice.

[seneca]

> The NYTimes isn't left wing

Allsides media bias rating for NYT is lean left[1], a -2.2 with -6 as the most extreme and 0 as neutral. Rating is left for their opinion section[2], a -4.

1. https://www.allsides.com/news-source/new-york-times

2. https://www.allsides.com/news-source/new-york-times-opinion-...

[nickff]

Perhaps the NYT isn't left-wing in a global context, and it is likely centrist in New York City, but it is definitely to the left of the median US voter. They're probably anti-union in this case because they're on tenuous financial footing, and unions in New York have a history of squeezing their employers out of business.

https://www.macrotrends.net/stocks/charts/NYT/new-york-times...

[mc32]

The NYT has been liberal since I can remember; however, up until relatively recent decades, it was respected by conservatives as well as liberals. Now it reflects liberal and progressive povs.

[hungie]

The NYT is not a left wing organization. It aligns, mostly, with a centrist Democrat politically. That position puts it pretty center right on the global scale.

A left wing paper would typically be pretty anti capitalist, anti imperial, etc. which the NYT is definitely not.

This is a global forum, it's important to remember that while the democrats in the US are called "the left" there, they really really are not a left wing party.

[adw]

"Center right" is if anything underselling it. The NYT is to the right of, for example, the Financial Times.

[walrushunter]

The Democrats are most definitely leftwing. What a preposterous thing to claim. Just because other countries are withering away under socialism, doesn't suddenly make the Dems right wing.

[keybored]

The NYT is as Left Wing as the journalistic profession is Ant-Establishment: Not in the slightest but they themselves constantly claim to be.

[matrix87]

They're about as left wing as hillary clinton. only when it's convenient for them

[MisterBastahrd]

Left wing?

The NYT is corporate wing. There's no charitable way to look at their reporting on the current election cycle and make the claim that they've treated the candidates equally. Donald Trump hasn't uttered a consecutive set of coherent sentences where he starts with an idea and finishes with an actual conclusion that isn't "and it'll be better / worse than ever before" in at least 5 years.