Adam Rubenstein, a former editorial assistant at The New York Times, has publicly criticized the newspaper, stating, "If the Times didn't chase out of the building any reporter or editor who understood the modern right, it wouldn't have made this egregious error." Rubenstein's comment, shared on social media, reignites discussions about the Times' internal culture and its approach to covering conservative viewpoints. This critique follows his previous public statements regarding his experience at the publication.
Rubenstein was notably involved in the controversial publication of Senator Tom Cotton's "Send in the Troops" op-ed in June 2020. This piece, which advocated for military deployment to quell civil unrest, sparked widespread internal dissent among Times staff and led to the resignation of opinion editor James Bennet. Rubenstein, who edited the op-ed, later departed the paper and has since detailed what he describes as a culture of liberal groupthink within the institution.
In a recent essay for The Atlantic, Rubenstein recounted an incident during a new hire orientation where he faced backlash for expressing a preference for Chick-fil-A, highlighting what he perceived as ideological intolerance. This anecdote, independently verified by The Atlantic, underscores his assertion that the Times struggles to accommodate diverse perspectives, particularly those associated with the "modern right." His criticisms align with those of other former Times staff, including Bari Weiss and James Bennet, who have also spoken out about the paper's internal ideological climate.
The New York Times has faced ongoing scrutiny regarding its political coverage, with some critics arguing it exhibits a liberal bias that alienates conservative readers. While the Times maintains a commitment to publishing diverse views, Rubenstein and others contend that the internal environment often stifles genuine engagement with right-leaning thought. The "egregious error" referenced in his tweet likely pertains to specific instances where he believes the paper's lack of understanding of conservative perspectives led to flawed reporting or editorial decisions.