A 24-hour strike at The New York Times, a historic demonstration in which more than 1,100 employees are expected to participate, began Thursday at midnight, after management and the union representing staffers failed to reach an agreement for a new contract after more than a year and a half of negotiating.
Fuck these journalists who have been demonising strikers for decades.
When rail workers and nurses strike. The world gets worse, because the work that they do adds value to the world.
If journalists strike, the world would be a better place, since they do not add value to the world. And they stop churning out their misleading garbage.
Next you gonna tell me that we need to support landlord strikes, cause they are technically workers* too.
Journalists perform labor and landlords don't. At least argue in good faith here.
It's also worth pointing out that these journalists don't have any real editorial control. Giving them more power in the workplace is a step toward changing that. You're getting angry at the workers for doing their job and collecting a paycheck instead of the guys who tell them what to write.
I don't expect the media class to be the vanguard but I also don't see any reason why we shouldn't lend them critical support in their struggle against their own oppressive class dynamics. It doesn't have to be a black-and-white sort of issue.
I don’t expect the media class to be the vanguard but I also don’t see any reason why we shouldn’t lend them critical support in their struggle against their own oppressive class dynamics.
When newsrooms unionize their content almost always shifts leftwards (see: The Onion) but some bitter assholes here want to act like that's a bad thing.
Exactly, the worst case scenario is nothing changes. There's literally nothing to lose by supporting the strike. They're not going to turn the NYT into an even more reactionary propaganda outlet by unionizing.
You make good points. I have trouble rooting for anything involving the NYT, but a union strike does also prevent them from publishing conservative traah for a while.
WaPo unionized in the 1930s and is an open shop; its union is famously weak. CNN isn't unionized as far as I know, but I'd definitely argue The Guardian US' beat reporting is more left now than it was in 2015.
You want a more recent example, look at the Chicago Tribune. Big difference in its editorial line from before and after it unionized in 2018. Hell, it pissed off John Kass so much that he quit. That alone moved the needle left on that paper.
Like these are still liberal institutions and I'm not expecting NYT reporters to start suddenly calling for a PPW, but goddamn. At least with a union reporters don't get fired for publicly expressing solidarity with like striking warehouse workers. I got canned once for doing just that.
Sorry, as a leftist I should support the very people who are actively trying to surpress and destroy unions, affordable health care, or any vaugly left political project.
All my effort should be speant protecting an adult nussery for the sons and daughters of various oligarchs and aristocrats too stupid and weak to get an actual job. We need to pay these people as much as we possibly can for there glorious opinion pieces and repeat state propaganda.
Unionization hurts the NYTs owners and further adds to the union moment of the journalism industry.
Every moment they’re striking is also time they’re not spending bashing unions or publishing unhinged transphobic op-eds.
I hate the NYT, but unionization is a net win. @TheFreshestHell also pointed out the onion went much further left after they properly unionized. Not holding my breadth on that last bit, but critical support is warranted.
Fuck these journalists who have been demonising strikers for decades. When rail workers and nurses strike. The world gets worse, because the work that they do adds value to the world. If journalists strike, the world would be a better place, since they do not add value to the world. And they stop churning out their misleading garbage.
Next you gonna tell me that we need to support landlord strikes, cause they are technically workers* too.
Journalists perform labor and landlords don't. At least argue in good faith here.
It's also worth pointing out that these journalists don't have any real editorial control. Giving them more power in the workplace is a step toward changing that. You're getting angry at the workers for doing their job and collecting a paycheck instead of the guys who tell them what to write.
I don't expect the media class to be the vanguard but I also don't see any reason why we shouldn't lend them critical support in their struggle against their own oppressive class dynamics. It doesn't have to be a black-and-white sort of issue.
When newsrooms unionize their content almost always shifts leftwards (see: The Onion) but some bitter assholes here want to act like that's a bad thing.
Exactly, the worst case scenario is nothing changes. There's literally nothing to lose by supporting the strike. They're not going to turn the NYT into an even more reactionary propaganda outlet by unionizing.
Now I am holding my breath waiting for this exact thing to happen
NYT fires entire writing staff and replaces them with even more ghoulish ones
You make good points. I have trouble rooting for anything involving the NYT, but a union strike does also prevent them from publishing conservative traah for a while.
The Onion isn't a news source lmao. Do you have example of any actual news outlets like WaPo, CNN, The Guardian, etc. going leftwards?
WaPo unionized in the 1930s and is an open shop; its union is famously weak. CNN isn't unionized as far as I know, but I'd definitely argue The Guardian US' beat reporting is more left now than it was in 2015.
You want a more recent example, look at the Chicago Tribune. Big difference in its editorial line from before and after it unionized in 2018. Hell, it pissed off John Kass so much that he quit. That alone moved the needle left on that paper.
Like these are still liberal institutions and I'm not expecting NYT reporters to start suddenly calling for a PPW, but goddamn. At least with a union reporters don't get fired for publicly expressing solidarity with like striking warehouse workers. I got canned once for doing just that.
Hey have you considered :pigpoop:
I wish the reporters at the new york times everything they wish for workers, unions, minorities, and trans people.
A win / win would be them winning the strike and then still collapsing in a year.
Poop and piss, shit and farts even. Bad take.
Sorry, as a leftist I should support the very people who are actively trying to surpress and destroy unions, affordable health care, or any vaugly left political project. All my effort should be speant protecting an adult nussery for the sons and daughters of various oligarchs and aristocrats too stupid and weak to get an actual job. We need to pay these people as much as we possibly can for there glorious opinion pieces and repeat state propaganda.
Unionization hurts the NYTs owners and further adds to the union moment of the journalism industry.
Every moment they’re striking is also time they’re not spending bashing unions or publishing unhinged transphobic op-eds.
I hate the NYT, but unionization is a net win. @TheFreshestHell also pointed out the onion went much further left after they properly unionized. Not holding my breadth on that last bit, but critical support is warranted.
deleted by creator