By Alex P. Vidal
“To read a newspaper is to refrain from reading something worth while. The first discipline of education must therefore be to refuse resolutely to feed the mind with canned chatter.” – Aleister Crowley
EVERY morning before seven o’clock, I pick up a copy of the New York Times outside the door of my workplace in Midtown Manhattan.
Believe it or not, in this age of digital media, there are still many readers who find it most convenient and interesting to read the newspapers, including the New York Times, in print.
And we are regular subscribers.
Many media companies still reliant on advertising are now grappling with declines that are expected to worsen as the economy slows.
Our grandfathers’ breakfast habit of reading the morning paper while sipping a cup of coffee, meanwhile, is still very much alive until today.
While every information and “breaking” news can now be quickly accessed on the internet and mobile phones, nothing can beat the printed news when it comes to review and evaluation of events and their major details that unfolded the day before and their accompanying series.
I don’t really like the paper’s front page lay-out, but I trust the accuracy and volume of its news; the quality and substance of opinions and the op-ed section in general. This makes the paper trustworthy and reliable in the eyes of dyed in the wool periodical readers.
-o0o-
What I like most is the paper’s Saturday edition because of the free magazine that regularly features articles about the latest wonders of technology, climate change, space travel, education, racism, violence, biography, animal kingdom, immigration, poetry and literature, food supply, and agriculture.
Everything we want to know about what happened in America and the rest of the world less than 24 hours ago, we can get it straight from the morning papers (some broadsheets and tabloids print evening editions), including the 171-yer-old the New York Times.
As I write this article, I’m not sure if I will have something to pick up outside the door when I wake up tomorrow as it was reported that the New York Times was bracing for a 24-hour walkout Thursday (December 8) by hundreds of journalists and other employees, in what would be the first strike of its kind at the newspaper in more than 40 years.
A report from NBC New York said newsroom employees and other members of The NewsGuild of New York have declared they were fed up with bargaining that has dragged on since their last contract expired in March 2021.
-o0o-
The union announced last week that more than 1,100 employees would stage a 24-hour work stoppage starting at 12:01 a.m. December 8 unless the two sides reach a contract deal.
Negotiations reportedly lasted for more than 12 hours into late Tuesday (December 6) and continued Wednesday (December 7), but the sides remained far apart on issues including wage increases and remote-work policies.
“It’s looking very likely that we are walking on Thursday,” said Stacy Cowley, a finance reporter and union representative, quoted by NBC New York. “There is still a pretty wide gulf between us on both economic and a number of issues.”
NBC New York added that it was unclear how the day’s coverage would be affected, but the strike’s supporters include members of the fast-paced live-news desk, which covers breaking news for the digital paper. Employees reportedly planned a rally for Thursday afternoon outside the newspaper’s offices near Times Square.
New York Times spokesperson Danielle Rhoades Ha told The Associated Press that the company has “solid plans in place” to continue producing content, that include relying on international reporters and other journalists who are not union members.
At the end of 2021, BBC reported that the New York Times employed about 5,000 people, including more than 2,000 in journalism operations.
(The author, who is now based in New York City, used to be the editor of two local dailies in Iloilo.—Ed)
