NYT journalists on pensions, other issues

This memo was sent to New York Times staffers:

Subject: your colleagues on Guild pension video, now up on YouTube

A few weeks ago, the Guild asked a number of the paper’s journalists to sit down and talk on video about the negotiations, the issues important to them, how they feel about working at the Times, and so on.

The first video is finally ready. It is about several issues, but particularly about pensions: why they are so valuable, and how much the Times is trying to take from us by demanding a pension freeze.

The original target audience is inside our own building –members who may have doubts about fighting to save the pension.

But it’s powerful enough – I think – to be shown to any audience.

Please have a look – it includes David Dunlap, Jim Dwyer, Clyde Haberman, John Schwartz, Nadia Taha, Joyce Wadler, George Vecsey, Willy Rashbaum, Claiborne Ray, Erik Piepenburg, Andrea Kannapell, Karen Grzelewski, Jennifer Mascia, Kevin Sack and myself. Others also spoke and I gather the plan is to use them in future videos

Comments

comments

4 comments
  1. Prefer to Remain Anonymous said:

    I’m sorry that the Times’ staffers suddenly find themselves in the same position all the rest of us — those of us with jobs — are in. But if they actually did some real put-the-screws-to-the-powers-that-be reporting, I would have a little more empathy.

    1. The Times’ reporting on the NYPD is notoriously lax.
    2. They continue to treat unemployment reporting as a piece of stenography.
    3. They simply aren’t showing me enough of the old-fashioned journalism for me to bleed for their suddenly having to face a 401(k) instead of a pension.

    When they start acting like they aren’t the only ones this has happened to, then we can revisit it. But for now, you reap what you sow, and the Times has been floating along on autopilot for a long time now.

  2. Dan Mitchell said:

    Still, they DO tend to avoid cliches and horribly mixed metaphors.

  3. Prefer to Remain Anonymous said:

    Yes. But I suspect that’s more by accident than by any deliberate act.

    Thank God, we’re keeping this to the trivial. Wouldn’t want a discussion on journalism breaking out.

  4. jon said:

    they don’t mix metaphors, but they are terribly biased in their political coverage.
    i suppose most journalists are more bothered by mixed metaphors. sigh.