As a seasoned gamer who’s seen more news cycles than I care to remember, this latest turn of events at the Los Angeles Times leaves me feeling a bit like a character in a complex narrative-driven game. The plot twist is unexpected, the stakes are high, and the players are as colorful as any cast in a role-playing saga.
On Thursday, Robert Greene, Karin Klein, and Mariel Garza, all former members of the Los Angeles Times’ editorial team, announced their departure from the newspaper after it chose not to endorse any presidential candidate for the 2024 election.
A Semafor article released on Tuesday suggested that Patrick Soon-Shiong, proprietor of The Times, interfered with the editorial board’s process of endorsing a candidate, as they were about to make their decision.
Garza announced his resignation in an interview with the Columbia Journalism Review on Wednesday, expressing that he felt it necessary to publicly state that he is uncomfortable with our silence during these times. He emphasized that in challenging circumstances, truthful individuals should speak out. This action represents how he is choosing to voice his concerns.
Greene served as an opinion columnist at the Times, focusing on issues such as water, drought, criminal justice reform, law enforcement, mental health, and Los Angeles County administration. In 2021, he was awarded the Pulitzer Prize for Editorial Writing due to his outstanding work critiquing the LA criminal justice system. Klein, a former member of the Times’ board, penned editorials on education, environmental conservation, nutrition, and scientific advancements.
Hugo Martin, a representative from the council of the LA Times guild, expressed in a statement to The Hollywood Reporter that “the recent departures of skilled journalists represent a significant loss for the newsroom, and more so for the editorial board.” He also stated that “we continue to support our colleagues who have been unfairly accused of this decision not to endorse.
Martin commented, “Moreover, I might as well mention that the majority of our newsroom staff are indignant over this situation. With short notice, we managed to organize a Zoom gathering to address it, which attracted roughly 100 participants.
In an interview with CJR, Garza claimed that the editorial board of the newspaper had been prepared to back Democratic presidential candidate Kamala Harris and had even started drafting an editorial to announce this decision. However, she admitted that she didn’t think the endorsement would significantly influence the voting choices of Times readers due to its liberal leanings. Nevertheless, Garza stated that the endorsement mattered because “it’s a critical moment when you express your convictions regardless of the consequences.
In a post on X (previously known as Twitter), on Wednesday afternoon, the owner of The Times expressed that he had proposed to the editorial board the opportunity to compose an unbiased analysis of the POSITIVE and NEGATIVE policies implemented by EACH presidential candidate during their terms in the White House. He also requested the editorial board to share their perspective on how the policies proposed during the candidates’ campaigns could unfold over the next four years if they were elected, thereby enabling our readers to make an informed decision about who would be a suitable president for the subsequent four years. In essence, he suggested that by providing this clear, non-partisan information side-by-side, our readers could decide on the most worthy candidate for the presidency.
Rather than following the proposed path, the Editorial Board opted for silence, a choice I respected. I encourage you all to #vote.” – Soon-Shiong.
THR has reached out to the Times for comment.
Read More
Sorry. No data so far.
2024-10-25 07:54