The New York Times speaks with forked tongue
The New York Times is able to take both sides on an issue. Especially when its own financial interests lie on one of the sides.
“The argument against unions–that they unduly burden employers with unreasonable demands–is one that corporate America makes in good times and bad. . . . The real issue is whether enhanced unionizing would worsen the recession, and there is no evidence that it would. There is a strong argument that the slack labor market of a recession actually makes unions all the more important.”
- New York Times editorial, December 29, 2008
“The New York Times News Service will lay off at least 25 editorial employees next year and will move the editing of the service to a Florida newspaper owned by The New York Times Company. . . . The plan for the news service calls for The Gainesville Sun, whose newsroom is not unionized and has lower salaries, to take over editing and page design.”
- New York Times, November 13, 2009
And the funniest thing about the Times hypocrisy is that it was reported by the New York Post.
Source: New York Post via Best of the Web
Subscribe, tweet, share, tell a friend!
Browse before and after this article
NEWER: Top black Democrat complains, “I’m getting tired of saving Obama’s can”
Related Posts
- Schizophrenic New York Times loves 5-4 Supreme Court decisions. Sometimes.
- Stop the presses! New York Times discovers John Edwards scandal!
- New York Times playing strip poker to survive
- New New York Times motto: Better late than never
- News flash: The New York Times is conservative
{ 6 comments… read them below or add one }
That tongue could come in handy if you talked out of both sides of your mouth, but I’m not pointing any fingers? ..l..
That picture is truly gross. Now I remember why I didn’t become a nurse.
eiyayei. I wonder if his(?) parents are saints who don’t know where they went wrong or if they’re the reason for the mutilation. my bet is on the latter.
That’s because you guys don’t understand the nature of the corporation. Supporting unions or not supporting unions is a position a media corporation will take depending on how much money they can make from subscribers. It does not reflect how they truly feel about unions.
In other words, corporations rarely make moral or immoral decisions. They make amoral decisions that are driven by what is the most financially beneficial. What side a newspaper takes on union issues regarding other companies, is no reflection on how that newspaper will treat union employees itself.
Funny how right to work states have better productivity in the same industries that also exist in states where the unions has those industries on lock down. And people say America cannot compete any more… Bulls*it!
The track record of the businesses in the right to work states speak the facts. They have unions there too- its just not a ‘union only’ mob style take over of a productive work force.
CA is the wild card argument however (its not right to work). But due to its size and extreme diversity of businesses and access to many ports for shipping its economic power is not based on efficient or inefficient production alone.
This is not an anti Union argument- its an anti oversized and corrupt left leaning Union issue. Hey, those NYT guys all moved to FL after all… I wonder why? It must be for the orange juice and sunshine.
I like the picture of the kid who went to see his dentist under the Obamacare Oral Hygiene Plan. Very revealing…
O.k. I don’t know a lot about the right to work stuff, but as I figured we were getting only part of the story. You say productivity is higher. Of that I have no doubt. The less power the workers have the higher the production is. Look at Mexico, China, Taiwan. If workers are powerless, then they are going to work more hours, complete more work, and receive fewer benefits or get fired. And that’s what right to work is really all about.
Right to work was started by southern businessmen (not that anyone would ever accuse a southern bussinessman of taking advantage of people for their own gain). It is intended to weaken unions and exploit the American worker.
What you fail to mention is that work place injuries and fatalities are higher in “Right to Fire” states. This from the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics.
I think it’s pretty funny how conservatives are all for capitalism up until workers engage in it and demand higher prices for their services.
You guys need to stop looking at jobs as hand outs. Also, understand that while you are trying to grow your fortune by way of your business, other Americans don’t give a fu*k. You want someone to get up at 4 a.m. and go labor doing the same repetative sh*t over and over for years to grow your fortune, you’d better be ready to pay them. Otherwise what’s in it for them? people can stay home and be broke.
My personal opinion is that we should all start our own business, that way no one would have employees to worry about paying. But then none of us would be in business either. We need employees to build our products and provide our services.
Likewise, if we don’t pay people enough to get by, then who are we going to sell our products and services to? The consumer drives the economy, but only if the consumer has disposable income.