The New York Times always takes a beating from conservatives that decry that the respected newspaper is too liberal. Over the tip line we hear of an incident that makes me cringe. Rutgers journalism professor Allan Wolper writes in Editor & Publisher about one of his students:
Kejal Vyas, one of my best journalism students at Rutgers-Newark, in Newark, N.J., was in Delhi completing some academic work when he received this Feb. 1 e-mail from Nancy Sharkey, senior editor/recruiting for The New York Times, responding to his inquiry about an internship:
“Hi Kejal, Based on what Allan Wolper has written about us, I cannot imagine that he would want one of his students to intern here. I guess if we need students from New Jersey, we will go elsewhere. Best, Nancy…”Mark Goodman, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, an organization that monitors censorship on college and high school campuses, was as stunned as I was when I told him Vyas’ story.
“The message here for journalism professors is that if you want your students to get an internship at The New York Times, you don’t criticize the Times in what you write,” Goodman told me. “It seems grossly inappropriate and unfair. I’ve never heard of anything like this happening before.” [Link]
<
p>Wolper writes that he followed up with Sharkey on belhalf of Vyas, in order to clarify as to why he was rejected:
Sharkey laughed and said she was being “snide” when she wrote to Vyas. Then, to my amazement, she virtually repeated what she had written to him: “I don’t see why you’d want your students to work at the Times, considering what you’ve written about us.”It was something that I thought I would never hear from a New York Times news executive. Afterwards, I called Catherine Mathis, the Gray Lady’s vice president of corporate communications, briefed her on what Sharkey had said, and sent her a copy of the Sharkey-Vyas e-mails. [Link]
<
p>Here is an old example of something that Wolper once wrote that Sharkey and others at the Times may have disliked:
What would Americans think if they knew that their best newspaper, The New York Times, had allowed one of its national-security reporters to negotiate a book deal that needed the approval of the CIA?
What would they say if they knew the CIA was editing the book while the country is days or weeks away from a war with Iraq and is counting on the Times to monitor the intelligence agency?
They would be properly horrified. [Link]
Abhi, So not like you to be sensationalistic 🙂 I agree that Vyas got screwed by the NYTimes but did he really get screwed because he was desi or because NYTimes disliked the views of the professor that lauded him? I read stuff like this and somehow why am I not surprised. The NYTimes is a severely snobby organization as liberal as they make themselves sound.
No way. Does my post sound like that is what I am implying? I did not mean it to if it does. I think he got screwed simply because the Times didn’t like his professor.
OK we agree. Its a shame when you see a young person who is qualified get in the political crossfire. It’s NYTimes loss. Any of the top publications will surely bank on it and hire this kid.
Now can you please keep that promise you made about wrestling with Vinod? 🙂
I was also expecting to read a story about racism in the Times’ hiring policies. I’m not sure if it’s really a problem with the title you chose: they did reject a desi candidate.
Couple of things: 1.Vyas didn’t get the short end of the stick, because he was “Desi”. It was his association with the Prof. that cost him the internship.
2.Why believe the Prof’s words?…May be he has an agenda of his own. NY Times might be smart not have an intern who is under this Prof’s tutelage.
May be its a long shot at conspiracy…without complete facts, I can support NY Times & “yell” TROJAN HORSE
yep it doesnt matter what race the fella is. In NYtimes view he went to the wrong school with the wrong professors.
You have a point there, BUT an interns work usualy is not something that would disrupt a paper or allow him to collect “intelligence” on the times. Times is being more bitchy here.
May be it is an elaborate conspiracy, a reject from NYT based on the ideology of his prof may look appealing to Bill O’Reilly. They are setting Kejal up for a stint at Fox News.
I think the Times is idiotic because they just gave some conservative mediots a field day. That said, I’m not sure they did such a horrible thing. As an employer, I certainly reserve my right not to hire the perceived protege of someone who trashed my organization.
The headline (“Unfairly Rejects” does make a pretty severe value judgment about the Times action. Not that there’s anything wrong with that, but to be clear, its not without a doubt unfair…
I think the post name change was sensible. I know what you meant Abhi, but it was a bit misleading.
There. I changed the headline now so it reads better.
“There. I changed the headline now so it reads better.”
Thanks, I guess. Though, if you genuinely felt it was unfair, I hope there was no pressure to change. I would hate to see the authors on this site tone their point of view down.
No, I posted in a hurry this morning. I’d rather the headline be accurate.
wow.. just…waaaaoow.
Sharkey laughed this off as being “snide”?! Oh, to be entitled and priviledged with that silver spoon tickling the back of my throat. Can’t you just hear her saying, “dahling, you cahn’t expect to write meeean things about us, and then plant your little mole here, do you? Oh..what? Ethics? Bother, how dreadfully boring!”
You know… from that class of women who don’t have to prove their seriousness or intelligence or work ethics because an ivy degree (legacy), a trust fund, and the security of being born ahead of the rest allows for that carelessly frivolous tone…
I always sadly hope that the Style/living/home/magazine sections don’t actually reflect the lifestyles of those who work at the Grey Lady. Silly silly me.
Cic, I disagree. They’re a private org, and they have the right to employ whomever they wish (though visiting the ‘sins’ of Wolper upon his students is a bit childish). They’re not the gov’t, there are plenty of illustrious NYT competitors like the WaPo and the WSJ, there’s no monopoly.
Google just did something like this with Cnet. Again, it’s not mature, but it’s legitimate tit-for-tat.
upon reading the whole article, the professor says that the student in question gave his name because he was the person “who deals with internships for the students” – not really because he was someone the student counted on for a reference. as someone who went through the rutgers journalism program (though not at rutgers newark), you kind of have to have your internship coordinator approve internships before you can take them and provide proof of getting credit and all that.
it’s a minor detail but still it makes the rejection seem even more unfair, because as a student you can hardly help who your internship coordinator is.
Although this seems juvenile and elitist in approach, the NY times does have every right to deny someone based upon their references.
Seriously. If the company does not like the reference, they have every right to deny said person based upon it. That is not discriminatory practice, just business. You don’t hire everyone totally in the blind, their professional background matters. In this case, the person just has the wrong professional references that aren’t looked upon well.
Manish and Gujudude,
My point wasn’t in regard to the hiring practices (though yes, I do find this unfair), it was about elitism.
Exactly. And the questions is: why wasn’t this reference looked upon well? It’s childish (as Manish put it) to snub an intern for the fact that one of his professors critized the company. It’s elitism, of the highest order, to write “I guess if we need students from New Jersey, we will go elsewhere.” (emphasis mine)
The NYTimes get slammed again and again for being out-of-touch and elitist. That’s a key criticism leveled against the organization by right-wingers of all stripes. The ‘limousine liberal’ image has seriously damaged democratic credibility.
And what does the effn Senior Editor write? A Senior Editor who, one assumes, plays some part in determining “all the news that’s fit to print”? Nothing but jejune, “snide,” jabs at (again) an intern, instead of a serious, respectful rejection based on some tangible fact that doesn’t involve sneering at the state of New Jersey.
Ugh. Clearly Jayson Blair and Harold Raines were just symptoms of a larger malaise.
cicatrix:
I agree with your assessment on how this looks. But the NY times doesn’t have a shortage of people applying for internship positions. The Editor’s attitude absolutely stinks and is arrogant and pompous. SHE has also displayed an unprofessional attitude.
All someone in a hiring position has to say is,”Thanks for applying, but we’ve decided to go in a different direction.”
When asked further, all the diva of an editor had to say was,”We are currently looking at other applicants whose qualifications/resume appeal to us, thanks again for applying.”
Mentioning how she/NY times hates her professor was stupid and shows how idiotic management can get. It’s petty, but not illegal. Tact and professionalism get thrown out the window.
er, GujuDude.. How is that a disagreement? I never said it was illegal. You basically underscored, italicised and highlighted my point.
Cicatrix – I agree with you completely. But don’t forget arrogant. They’re out-of-touch, elitist, and arrogant, to boot.
AK – I think GujuDude said it for me 😉
I am a redundant idiot. 🙂
As far as good reporting, they are a real monopoly. WaPo is poor man’s NYT but WSJ does not even come close. Their op-ed page is run by the Bush Administration. Paul Gigot has taken a real good op-ed and made it another NR, weekly standard. No balance. Al Hunt – where are you ? Their reporting is OK. Too much focus on dots. Thanks god they moved their weekly TV program from PBS to Faux News.
no worries GujuDude 😉
here’s an article on the matter.
http://media.www.rutgersobserver.com/media/paper822/news/2006/02/27/News/Times.Newark.Need.Not.Apply-1639269.shtml?sourcedomain=www.rutgersobserver.com&MIIHost=media.collegepublisher.com
I do not appreciate coming on the internet, and seeing people trashing others like this. Would you like to see a fellow family member who has become sucessful in their life bashed in such manner? Take it from me, I know from first hand. Nancy Sharkey is my aunt. Joe Sharkey, my uncle. And ciatrix, it is just too funny how you described my aunt Nancy. She is in no way, shape, or form like that. I would know after knowing her for about 20 years.
The NYtimes had been trashed by Vyas’s professor. They do not easily forget these things, just as regular citizens never forget being humiliated. Vyas just so happened to have gone to the wrong school, and had the wrong professor. I do not see why the professor would push for Vyas to become an intern for the NYtimes, if he had truly written his critizisim the way he really felt about NYtimes. A professor should not want his student to work for a place he does not like. Also, the NYtimes had every right to reject Vyas’s application. It’s as simple as that. But I do believe there is something more to this Wolper. Why would he follow up to the NYtimes to ask why his student was rejected when he had critized them before? He should have left it as it was if he did not like the NYtimes.