The Wall Street Journal Editorial Board responded Friday to employee rejection of the newspaper’s opinion section and diversity in its newsroom, declaring that “we are not the New York Times” and will not succumb to “canceling the culture “
In a note to readers, the editorial board sought to reassure readers that “these pages will not wither under pressure to cancel culture,” signaling the “flow of support” from readers for opinion pages.
“It was probably inevitable that the wave of progressive cancellation culture would hit the Journal, as it has at almost any other cultural, commercial, academic, and journalistic institution. But we are not the New York Times. Most Journal reporters try to cover the news fairly and in-between, and our opinion pages offer an alternative to the uniform progressive views that dominate almost all the media today, “the note said.
DEMS, MEDIA RAMP UP CLAIM THAT TRUMP WILL USE MILITARY TO ‘STEAL’ THE 2020 ELECTIONS
“As long as our owners give us the privilege to do so, opinion pages will continue to publish contributors who express their opinions within the tradition of vigorous and reasoned discourse. And these columns will continue to promote the principles of free people and free markets.” , who are more important than ever in what is a culture of increasing progressive conformity and intolerance. “
In a June 23 letter to its editor-in-chief, Matt Murray, a group that identified itself only as “members of the WSJ newsroom” wrote to “encourage more muscular reporting on racial and social inequalities.”
The writers alleged that their colleagues in the opinion section were hampering their own work, noting that some of them had been “informed by sources that they will not speak to us because they do not trust the WSJ to be independent from the editorial page.”
They also wrote that opinion writers “often make contradicted claims by WSJ reports,” drive misinformation about racism, and present facts selectively. Furthermore, the letter questioned whether The Journal was putting too much action on business leaders and government officials.
CRITICIANS CALL THE PRIMETIME SILENCE OF CNN AND MSNBC IN CHICAGO MASS SHOOTING: ‘SCREAMING HEADLINES’ ANYWHERE ELSE
“Reporters often encounter resistance when they try to reflect the accounts and voices of workers, residents, or customers, and some editors express high skepticism about the credibility of those sources compared to executives, government officials, or other entities,” it said. the letter. “We should apply the same healthy skepticism to everyone we cover.”
Furthermore, the group highlighted a case in which the “contempt” of the opinion section for its newsroom has “jeopardized the security of the newsroom,” citing the case of a Saudi-based journalist who had been “put at risk” by a “false claim” from an opinion contributor on Twitter.
“As reporters, we have been told over the years to look for more diverse people as sources, given their general lack of representation in our news coverage. But as long as opinion in its current state is part of our brand, we will face difficulties in recruit diverse talents and build trust with sources, “they noted. “It is understandable why someone reading about system police racism as a ‘myth’ at WSJ might not trust our newsroom to be fair, honest, or welcoming.”
Their proposed solutions to the problems they raised include naming journalists to specifically cover “race, ethnicity, and inequality,” naming two editors of standards specializing in diversity, conducting a study on the racial, ethnic, and gender breakdown of gender issues. The Wall Street Journal “Most Outstanding, Resource-Intensive Stories” and Bringing More Diversity to Newsroom and Leadership Positions.
“We hope that our letter serves as a call to action and serves as a record of newsroom concerns,” they concluded, giving their management a deadline of August 20 to address their concerns.
CLICK HERE TO GET THE FOX NEWS APP
The New York Times faced a backlash from its employees last month over an opinion piece written by Senator Tom Cotton, R-Arkansas, who approved of using the military to quell the unrest. The editor of the newspaper’s editorial page, James Bennet, resigned.
A month later, Times columnist and opinion editor Bari Weiss resigned from her position and issued a letter criticizing an “illiberal environment” and accusing her colleagues of intimidating her for their divergent views.
