That was really insightful to read and really explained a lot about how frustrated I’ve been feeling while reading the Times this past year. Everything has shifted and become stilted, it’s been sad to notice.
What you didn't say (and might not believe either) is that the skewed coverage by the Times is complicit in electing Trump to his second term. To stay and keep writing for an outlet like that is.... everyone's personal decision. I am glad yours was to leave.
Observing Bloomberg Television and their on-air hosts deal with likely changed editorial direction has been interesting ... On 'Surveillance' Jonathan Ferro said that corporates had been "cloaking" themselves in left ideology until Trump 2 (infinity) liberated them ... am preparing a post now on it
Great piece! Thanks for sharing. This is helping convince some of my older friends about the NYT too many years as the default news option
Also, please consider finding a less nazi-promoting platform, substack has no guarantee of staying independent
Thanks for elaborating on your departure. I loved your newsletter (and now follow your blog). Email from The Contrarian (Jennifer Rubin's departure took me there) announced your guest piece.
I wish things weren't falling to pieces, but here we are. And I'm reconsidering my NYT subscription...
Ironically I subscribed to the Times for their work during Trump 1. But in the last year especially I saw more thought and analysis in the comments sections than in many of the opinion pieces. I'm thrilled I found your substack after.
Dark times. We saw the NYTimes capitulate in the 1930s.
I think oddly enough the backlash will come from the cult. Most of them are on prescriptions, most of them are on Medicare, most of them use SNAP and childcare. They hurt themselves.
Great decision👏 NYT today is as toxic as Twitter. After all the propaganda articles they’ve posted in favour of Russia and Hamas, they have zero credibility and deserve to be shunned by any self respecting person
Every time decided to cancel my @nyt subscription, I reminded myself how much I value your writings. As a non economist, I enjoyed the reading and it made me look smart. Nowadays, I hardly find anything to read in the newspaper of record and will most certainly cancel my subscription by March.
Welllll... The editorial section takes much less time to get thru now.
So disappointed in them, my dad spent his working life with them. Very sad. Peter Coy is ok...
I already cancelled my subscription to the Washington Post and now the New York Times. Now we are left with two questions: (1) What do we do without Trump? (2)What do we do without Krugman?
You were careful to not make any assumptions about why the approach of editors and management changed. Are you yet in a place where it is safe to say? Why do you think? Maybe if you say in the form of a guess?
The NY Times in a sentence: “These rewrites almost invariably involved toning down, introducing unnecessary qualifiers, and, as I saw it, false equivalence.”
You were a prime reason I read the Times since entering adulthood, 2001.
It did occur to me that, being an avid reader of your blog/newsletter/Titter, that your columns had less value, as they were mostly rewordings of things I had already read from you.
Because of this NYT management may have considered your blog/newsletter/twitter to reduce the value of a NYT subscription, if you can get the same Krugman for free elsewhere.
The Times is worthless for opinion pieces anymore. Not one writer is worth reading (some are better used for TP, I’m looking at you Pamela Paul). I keep my subscription for the games and cooking.
I think I saw what you're describing in your columns; I stopped reading them because they struck me as bland. And I absolutely get the "intrusive" editing part, as I've lived it. It's usually about the editor's ego and whether you (the writer) are complying with his/her worldview.
I do miss your column. It was a major reason I read the paper for the last 20 years. And I miss the deeply knowledgeable policy opinions that the Times used to provide. Treacle seems to be on the rise.
I was asked to write a piece for the section in 2024 and had a similar experience. Endless rewrites and micromanaging and a fixation on a "fresh" argument. Eventually I just pulled the piece. It's sad to see things go this way! Thanks for sharing this behind the scenes.
You've been one of my most valued Times voices for decades. Reading about your experience since last year is at once shocking and nauseating.
The last few days have seen some powerful anti-Trump pieces in the opinion section; I have to wonder, what broke that those got out? >
On a more basic level—and these are more just questions that float in my mind than anything I would expect you to answer—how much of the Times changes can be attributed to actual Trumpism among top management/owners?
Or to belief that Trump would somehow help the Times' bottom line? >
Or to mere fear of Trump/Trumpism, regardless of whether coddling Trumpism meant losing money?
Did management/ownership in fall 2024 imagine that its drip-drip normalizing of Trump and concern-trolling of Harris would play a nontrivial role in sinking Harris, >
"We had this story already" is the laziest excuse in news meetings. It's a badge of conventional wisdom, excellence and fealty to the status quo. Fuck the NYT and all the pricks who love cooing to people at parties they're "journalists."
We, all Journalism students, looked up to the NYT and held it dear like a Bible to our writing styles. You deserve peace of mind! When things go dark, it's time to move on to a better light.🕯️Thank you so much for all you've done, will do, and things that you you're sharing with us, Paul. 🤝
It would be interesting to know why the NYTimes got worse like this. Is it an order from above? It really feels they completely lost touch in recent years - despite everyone pointing out out to them.
“according to the Times, I was writing too often” is an absolutely insane thing to read. Sorry the departure was for such moronic and disheartening managerial reasons, but hope the Substack is off to a great start for you and always look forward to your writing!
I wrote an opinion piece about The Challenger after it exploded and the editor refused to publish it. I stated that it could not have been an accident, a mistake, because these operations involve many fail safe mechanisms and technical staff that oversee quality control.
I was an op-ed writer for a college paper and the board felt uncomfortable about my position in the piece because the crash was reported as a national calamity.
I vividly recall his testimony before Congress, where Feynman requested for ice-water and ice, and he placed an O-ring in the glass of cold water; a short while later, he pulls out the ring and twisted it and it broke. Engineers had expressed serious concerns about the O-rings failing.
By this time, the consistent editorial bias of the newspaper concerned me, and I wrote an opinion piece that quoted the boilerplate about how The-College-Newspaper published predictably consistent views on certain matters, and expressed
my concern that despise the claim stated in the boilerplate, the editorial page predictably expressed consistent views; and I closed with the question: given the consistency of views published, what was the purpose of the notice at the top of the page? (meaning the boilerplate).
Krugman, I know that you can't/won't tell us anything approaching the full truth about the underlying cause for your deep dissatisfaction with the NYT in the last several years, so I'm going to do it for you. I think a good place to begin would be the 2020 Democratic primaries. It was very...1/
... obvious that the NYT did not want Joe Biden to win the Democratic nomination, not because they intensely disliked him the way they loathed Hillary Clinton, but because they knew that the bland Joe Biden was not going to help the NYT sell subscriptions. Yes, money does matter. So it was...2/
...settled by the top brass at the NYT that Joe Biden must be a one term president. From the very beginning of the Biden presidency, it became apparent to me (and undoubtedly to you) that almost any good news that would help Biden was underplayed by the NYT, and negative news that could...3/
...hurt Biden was emphasized if not exaggerated. So when Joe Biden decided being a two term president was something that he was very interested in, the NYT became desperate. They knew that Biden only had to win Wisconsin, Michigan, and Pennsylvania, which was still doable. For AG and company...4/
...this was unacceptable. I'm confident that this is why you experienced the intrusive editing in your last year. The tragedy is that the NYT and many other news organizations have known that Donald Trump helps generate revenues, unlike Joe Biden, or even Kamala Harris. So there is the constant...5/
Sad news. I became a digital subscriber to the NYT primarily because of your interesting and well-written opinion pieces. I will reconsider my subscription...
Yo @nytimes.com I’m a Sunday paper subscriber, 37 years old and am aware of a few other peers that also pay good money for your product. I thought we were supporting an editorial environment where my man Paul can do what he needs to do in service to our country. Turn it around please.
For many years I've read the NYT like the Russian dissidents did Pravda: determining what was factual; analyzing political/ideological assumptions for running news items, op/eds. But I always trusted your column was based on beliefs you articulated, supported by empirical data. Kudos and thanks!
I'm surprised you lasted that long after the abuse. The only reason I keep a minimum account with the NYTs is to read Jamelle Bouie's pieces and that's about it. Isn't it great to write what you want? The world is now your audience and not a curated one.
Good luck with your new endeavors! I've always enjoyed how your column has made complex economic issues more easily understood.
The NYT has been changing in recent years and not in a positive way. Less objective news and more spin. You may have some of the same issues that Bari Weiss had there.
Hooray! I really only read the NYT for you, Michelle Goldberg and Jamelle Bouie. I am already loving the Contrarion. Jen Rubin was the only reason left to read WaPo. I've cancelled both subscriptions and am throwing my $$$ behind outlets like yours. Bravo.
@pkrugman.bsky.social would you consider sharing thoughts on the economics and future of journalism in light of this? I subscribe to the NYT partly out of principle, to keep the "paper of record," however flawed it might be, funded. Is this quixotic or sensible?
I cancelled my NYT subscription due to their gross bias against Palestinians, their granting Zionist Howard Jacobs the front page to slander Jeremy Corbyn (this lifelong campaigner for social justice was supposedly a direct threat to British Jews), and their positive glee about the Ukrainian war.
Thank you so much for this heartfelt and enlightening piece. I am sorry you had to live this truth and write this piece. May better days be ahead but that seems trite and naive. Be well. Thank you.
Is it really though. Seems to me, he left b/c The Times wanted to lean/favor the right. Dude had documentation he shared about the Iraq war. We all know now that war should have never been fought. There were never any WMDs.
I am a retired TV reporter and photographer. I too constantly hit my head against the management ceiling. I persevered while being told my story ideas where to controversial. I had 4,000 contacts in my cellphone and could always attribute everything I wrote or spoke, but was told to tone it down.
I followed you on NYT for many years and was confused and disappointed when I noticed the shift in your tone, and then, later, relieved when I saw your writing on Substack. Thanks for the explanation and keep up the good work!
First, I canceled the Washington Post and subscribed to the New York Times only to cancel that after a couple weeks. I need to get a newspaper! This is awful.
What is interesting is how they demanded Paul's statements on the opinion page be backed up with evidence.
That is clearly not a hurdle the right wingers on the opinion page have to clear.
The double standards against liberals is whey this country can't have nice things.
@pkrugman.bsky.social If you could rewrite one NYT article that was edited to hell, which would it be? (And, if you have already rewritten it for your substack, link that too!)
For those who don't know this history too well, what do you mean by "despite Obama’s initial reluctance"? Was Obama not in favour of the ACA from the start?
Professor Krugman, it seems to me there needs to be an urgent conversation among elites regarding how to limit the damage when the wrecking crew decides to stop interest payments on the national debt. The conman will pitch it as trying to get a better deal.
I wish that I currently subscribed to the Times so that I could cancel. I’ve already cancelled my subscriptions to once-reliable news sources, including The Post and LA Times.
Wow that's a truly valuable glimpse into what we all sense has been going on. I am sorry things are trending this way at the Times. It's like seeing a canary coughing in the mine.
Dr. Krugman, the temporary pause of hundreds of billions of dollars in federal grants and loans has to be a drag on the economy. Can’t this be quantified?
"Putting it through the blander". Attribute this to a colleague of mine at a financial institution many years ago. The process of passing a draft through several management layers, then to Communications, Marketing, and Compliance.
NYT has become part of the problem and not part of the solution. When MAGA ignores the Constitution I don't want to hear about "both sides" of the situation.
Pity after such a journey, was always keen to read your contributions. The first one if I remember well was about the Asian crisis with a title like The good the bad and the ugly !
Thank you for this. One quick question - are there similar pressures on NYT fact reporting? And if we abandon all major newspapers, are we letting Elon Musk win?
"I tried in vain to explain that there’s a difference between having opinions about economics and knowing how to read C.B.O. analyses and recent research papers. It all fell on deaf ears."
Devastating to read but otherwise unsurprising that the editors pushed you out by their own incompetence. What an own-goal, and one that highlights the deeply problematic worldview the NYT higher-ups have.
you were the one reason i took a nyt subscription a couple of years ago.
you were the main reason i came to this platform about half a year ago, when you left the semi-swastika branded one.
you were the main reason i finally came to substack last week.
is there a PK Anonymous?
👏Wonderful piece about what journalism can & should be, and how the NYT failed all of us. Among other gems: "it became clear to me that the management I was dealing with didn’t understand the difference between having an opinion & having an informed, factually sourced opinion."[email protected]
Definitely sounds like you made the right moves but, ugh, the reasons are disheartening. Your columns during the Bush era were foundations for my political coming of age.
"Moreover, all Times opinion writers were banned from engaging in any kind of media criticism. Hardly the kind of rule that would allow an opinion writer to state, 'we are being lied into war.'"
Could you clarify how recently this policy came into effect? Great to see you go independent, regardless
Thank you so much for all of your writing - I've followed along since the mid-90's. Please note that I also appreciate your accessibility. No ivory towers, you!
Comments
I can speculate that they wanted you to write the same thing for NYT, somehow, but what language did they use to say this?
Was the Substack thing actually a contract breach?
I'm struggling to understand some subtext here.
1/2
2/2
Also, please consider finding a less nazi-promoting platform, substack has no guarantee of staying independent
I wish things weren't falling to pieces, but here we are. And I'm reconsidering my NYT subscription...
Read a lot of your work while at Cal. Bring on the charts!
I think oddly enough the backlash will come from the cult. Most of them are on prescriptions, most of them are on Medicare, most of them use SNAP and childcare. They hurt themselves.
I hope the left can shift a little to appreciate nuance a bit more.
So disappointed in them, my dad spent his working life with them. Very sad. Peter Coy is ok...
It did occur to me that, being an avid reader of your blog/newsletter/Titter, that your columns had less value, as they were mostly rewordings of things I had already read from you.
https://contrarian.substack.com/p/departing-the-new-york-times
The last few days have seen some powerful anti-Trump pieces in the opinion section; I have to wonder, what broke that those got out? >
Or to belief that Trump would somehow help the Times' bottom line? >
Did management/ownership in fall 2024 imagine that its drip-drip normalizing of Trump and concern-trolling of Harris would play a nontrivial role in sinking Harris, >
Is anyone in Times management/ownership who supported Trump having buyer's remorse now?
Please donate and share
https://gofund.me/164b211e
Those were difficult years, too. And I appreciated your insight.
This really clears that up. Glad you are here & on substack. Nice to have you unfiltered.
> "Elon Musk Nazified the site"
Apt.
Editors, editors
I wrote an opinion piece about The Challenger after it exploded and the editor refused to publish it. I stated that it could not have been an accident, a mistake, because these operations involve many fail safe mechanisms and technical staff that oversee quality control.
A few months later, Richard Feynman confirmed my inferred conclusions: https://www.nytimes.com/1986/06/07/us/amid-disputes-shuttle-panel-finally-forged-an-agreement.html
I therefore resigned my position as an editorial writer because the editor refused to publish all my opinions.
Some 25 years later, I searched the editor's name on the internet. She had graduated from said college
I feel better for me because I already cancelled the NY Times.
I sure bet that you wouldn't have been a problem if you had been writing about the dangers of trans girls playing volleyball ... over and over again!
The NYT has been changing in recent years and not in a positive way. Less objective news and more spin. You may have some of the same issues that Bari Weiss had there.
Glad you're still writing sir!!
That is clearly not a hurdle the right wingers on the opinion page have to clear.
The double standards against liberals is whey this country can't have nice things.
Nice summation of our national crisis.
you were the main reason i came to this platform about half a year ago, when you left the semi-swastika branded one.
you were the main reason i finally came to substack last week.
is there a PK Anonymous?
Ask anybody, I *hate* being wrong. That's a very odd talent you have there, Professor, making me like what I hate.
Thank you for the correction. Please keep at it. (I'll follow you anywhere.)
Could you clarify how recently this policy came into effect? Great to see you go independent, regardless