Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

axios.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

291–300 of 675 posts

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#291

Post by jakelazaroff »

ImJamal wrote: post #240
consteval wrote: post #200

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Does that make a difference or are y'all just constantly moving goalposts to fuel the narrative that media is inherently left-leaning? Because it's really not - especially not in the US. Go look through their articles. How many serve corporate interests? How many are fundamentally ultra-capitalists? You guys act like these are commies. No, they're right-leaning, just not far right insane wackos (Fox News). You're rig…

[flagged]

This would have been a much better comment without the last sentence.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#292

Post by squigz »

thegrim33 wrote: post #112
mint2 wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

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 artic…

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…

Let's just assume you're right, and this experiment is true a majority of the time... wouldn't another possible explanation be that that's a perfectly fair representation of things? Both sides aren't always equal. Weighing the coverage of both sides to be equal would be misleading.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#294

Post by gchamonlive »

bawolff wrote: post #253
aleph_minus_one wrote: post #157

It is not clear to me whether going on a strike is a good idea for the New York Times tech workers: Since media is not a sector that has high margins, when a company gets under pressure to have to increase the salaries (e.g. by strikes), the management better starts to analyze how you can reduce the number of, in this case, tech workers because with thin margins, budging in these negotiations is much more dangerous f…

> Instead of going on strike, it would in my opinion be a better idea for the tech workers to look for a better paid job in an industry with higher margins. If they alternative is quiting, than they don't have very much to lose by going on strike.

That's only true if you are guaranteed to find another job that pays at least as much as that one you are striking against before running out of savings money, otherwise it's always best to look for career movements while still employed.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#295

Post by donohoe »

ljlolel wrote: post #269
aurareturn wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t it a little ironic that NY Times, and most east coast media, is very anti big tech and pro union while their own employees are protesting because of low wages? Who are they to judge how big tech treats their employees when they pay their own so poorly?

They’re also incredibly non-diverse and complain about big tech being non-diverse.

“Incredibly non-diverse”? No. They are in a better position than most

https://www.nytco.com/2023-new-york-times-diversity-and-incl...

The my don’t complain about tech being non-diverse, they report that it is non-diverse - which is true.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#296

Post by donohoe »

ETH_start wrote: post #287
aurareturn wrote: post #267

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Isn’t it a little ironic that NY Times, and most east coast media, is very anti big tech and pro union while their own employees are protesting because of low wages? Who are they to judge how big tech treats their employees when they pay their own so poorly?

The NY Times is pro-union and anti-big-tech in large part because its journalists are unionized and tech platforms disintermediate unions. The workers that produce articles and create the newsroom culture have a conflict of interest that affects its editorial slant. There is also the factor that tech threatens the ad revenue of traditional news media.

I worked at NYT for seven years and I can say from direct personal experience that your many points are not true.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#297

Post by ExoticPearTree »

DanHulton wrote: post #69
notfried wrote: post #17

[flagged]

I'm kind of surprised it's _only_ 600 tech workers. They're a _huge_ digital company.

To run a site with 1B views a month or more you don't need many people. At my $day_job we have hundreds of millions of views per year and we're less than 100 _tech workers_, of which about ~ 10 do infrastructure and the rest are developers.

In order to be successful you need to have quality, not quantity.

But to answer your statement, 600 is a lot of people to have around in the tech part of the company.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#298

Post by gsky »

aurareturn wrote: post #267
janalsncm wrote: post #258

It should tell you something that 95% of the union voted to strike. I found more information from them here: https://www.nyguild.org/post/new-york-times-tech-guild-votes... I wonder how other news outlets will cover this, if at all. They’re probably afraid others will get the same idea.

Isn’t it a little ironic that NY Times, and most east coast media, is very anti big tech and pro union while their own employees are protesting because of low wages? Who are they to judge how big tech treats their employees when they pay their own so poorly?

Easier said than done, right. Who would dare to criticize them afterall

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#299

Post by ExoticPearTree »

kennywinker wrote: post #67
mbrumlow wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> The complexity of a massive org like the NYT is significantly non trivial. I think that is the point. At face value what they produce, simply should not be that complex. It seems it’s complex for the sake of being a big complex organization. And unions will only solidify that into stone to prevent any sort of optimization that would bring the complexity down.

> And unions will only solidify that into stone to prevent any sort of optimization that would bring the complexity down. It looks like you've bought into some anti-union talking points. Efficiency is sometimes good. But sometimes it's just a way of shifting profit from workers to capital. As an example: if I replace 100 workers managing a server farm with an AWS account - the money that would have paid 100 humans to…

> Efficiency is sometimes good.

Efficiency is always good. What you're basically saying is that you want to have your cake and eat it too. Which doesn't actually happen.

Re: New York Times tech workers union votes to authorize a strike

#300

Post by klooney »

donohoe wrote: post #295
ljlolel wrote: post #269

Earlier quoted context omitted.

They’re also incredibly non-diverse and complain about big tech being non-diverse.

“Incredibly non-diverse”? No. They are in a better position than most https://www.nytco.com/2023-new-york-times-diversity-and-incl... The my don’t complain about tech being non-diverse, they report that it is non-diverse - which is true.

60% white is much whiter than a tech company
Post reply on HN