1. We are a community of readers. Join us!

    Readup is a social reading platform. No ads. No distractions. No liking or upvotes. We help you pay attention to what matters: reading.

    The New York Times Company | MARC TRACY | 6/7/20 | 6 min
    6 reads2 comments
    The New York Times Company
    6 reads
    PadlockYou must read the article before you can post or reply.
    • bill
      Top reader this weekTop reader of all timeScoutScribe
      1 month ago

      Times employees objected despite a company policy instructing them not to post partisan comments on social media or take sides on issues in public forums.

      Wait WHAT?!? That is one of the most lunatic pieces of utter nonsense I've ever read. Who enforces that policy and how?

      I wasn't on social media for years, but when I got on Twitter about a month ago I was absolutely shocked at the waterfall of partisan tweets coming from NYTimes journalists on a daily basis. It's an absolute barrage. No joke, I actually thought that the opposite was true, that the NYTimes was encouraging it's employees to get on Twitter and be super political.

      (By the way, I'm not necessarily for or against journalists being partisan or being on Twitter. I'm just saying that I'm shocked to hear that such a policy exists because it's so totally not being followed.)

      1. Update (6/9/2020):

        Clarification: The article itself isn’t “utter nonsense.” Just that one little quote I provided. And, more specifically, the policy itself.

        P.S. I’ve certainly read much crazier nonsense and I regret the language I used there. I think the reason for my emotion is that I’ve been really freaked about the journalists-on-Twitter-industrial complex lately.

      • SEnkey
        1 month ago

        It does seem weird. I read opinion sections frequently. One reason is that what I frequently find outlandish turns out to be a common opinion among many people. Reading the best form of that opinion before encountering it among friends, family, or coworkers gives me time to offer a more mature response. This is the value of opinion sections.

        Does anyone really think that Cotton's editorial in the NYTimes had any effect on the riots? He could have, and for all I know did, broadcast his opinion on right wing news outlets where it might've been swallowed whole cloth. Instead he made his case to an audience he knows is not likely to agree with him. That is how democracy is supposed to work. If we refuse to let the Tom Cottons of the world, who do have influence in the government, space to explain their thinking to those of us who disagree - then where are they supposed to do it? And how are we ever going to understand each other or compromise?