It was only after McNeil and Mills faced new scrutiny for their previous actions that The Times no longer appeared comfortable standing beside them and the two men resigned. And in Mills’ case, he said The Times had been aware of the previous misconduct allegations when he started working at the company in 2016. In McNeil’s case, The Times said it had investigated his behavior in 2019 on the trip and disciplined him. The cases were distinct, but they had one thing in common: The Times had been aware of the prior behavior of both journalists and still chose to keep them employed in high-profile roles. Mills, an audio journalist who was instrumental in the creation of “The Daily,” exited after the “Caliphate” podcast he produced was found to have serious flaws, and the revelation of them prompted renewed focus on previous allegations of misconduct which he had acknowledged and apologized for. McNeil, a longtime health and science reporter whose star rose as he covered the coronavirus pandemic, parted ways with The Times two weeks after a story in The Daily Beast revealed he had used a racial slur while serving as an expert guide for students during a 2019 junket to Peru. and Andy Mills, did so under different circumstances. “It’s a real f**king disaster,” one Times employee remarked to CNN Business. It has also raised questions about The Times’ leadership and how equipped it is to navigate such challenges. There is no one-size-fits-all answer, but the lack of transparency from the top brass at The Times as to how such decisions are being made has frustrated staffers and demoralized a significant swath of the newsroom, multiple staffers at The Times told CNN Business in conversations this week. The announcement Friday of the departure of two high-profile journalists from The Times has spurred what some staffers have described as unprecedented levels of divisiveness and controversy inside the newsroom, with staffers warring with each other in private, on Facebook, and even in public on Twitter.Īt the core of the divide: What is the best course of action to take when The Times’ own reporters stand accused of violating some of the fundamental principles the newspaper champions? Exacerbating that divide is another question: Why can’t the Times’ leadership seem to decide on the best course of action in any given case and then stick with a decision once made? But events over the past several weeks reveal that the nation’s paper of record is largely divided when it discovers such issues sitting in its own backyard. (NYT) is familiar with breaking some of the biggest stories related to culture, race, and gender.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |