Key Takeaways
- • Two shareholder groups, the State Board of Administration of Florida (which oversees the Florida Retirement System Trust Fund, holding more than 160,000 New York Times shares) and the conservative National Center for Public Policy Research, sued The New York Times in New York County Supreme Court seeking internal records on its Israel coverage.
- • The 48-page complaint rests on claims from an unnamed former Jewish employee at the Times video desk, who allegedly raised antisemitism and anti-Israel bias concerns at least 15 times before leaving earlier this year.
- • The petitioners argue the Times published materially false details about Israel's war in Gaza and cite a corrected 2023 headline that they call "flagrantly false."
- • The Times called the suit "without merit" and "brought for an improper purpose," said it would defend the case vigorously, and framed it as an attempt to pressure an independent media organization.
Summary
Two shareholder groups filed suit against The New York Times on Wednesday in New York County Supreme Court, seeking access to internal corporate records to determine whether the paper is following its editorial standards in coverage of Israel's war in Gaza, according to Courthouse News. The petitioners are the State Board of Administration of Florida, which oversees the Florida Retirement System Trust Fund and holds more than 160,000 shares of Times stock, and the National Center for Public Policy Research, a conservative think tank that has been a shareholder since 2017. The State Board of Administration serves more than 1.2 million members and beneficiaries and is overseen by Republican Governor Ron DeSantis.
The 48-page complaint argues that the Times repeatedly published materially false details about the conflict and that "journalistic standards have been weaponized within the company to serve the personal agendas of unchecked editors." The case rests largely on the account of an unnamed former employee, a Jewish worker at the Times video desk, who the petitioners say first raised concerns about prejudiced reporting in 2019 and later took them to human resources. According to the petitioners, she raised concerns about antisemitism and bias against Israel at least 15 times before her departure earlier this year. They allege that a human resources response told her, "If you don't like our values here, maybe you should go find a place whose values align with yours," and that her desk supervisor said it was "not your job to be the ombudsman of the New York Times," a position the company eliminated in 2017.
The groups also point to specific coverage, including a 2023 header that they describe as "flagrantly false" for stating that Gaza deaths surpassed "any Arab loss in wars in [the] past 40 years." The Times corrected that headline six days later. The petitioners say they do not seek to "review, second-guess, or override any editorial judgment," but to fulfill their shareholder responsibility to ensure the paper's brand is not harmed by prejudicial reporting, and they argue the board must verify that its controls against such risks operate as needed.
A Times spokesperson, Charlie Stadtlander, rejected the filing. "This lawsuit has no merit and was brought for an improper purpose," he said, adding that although it is framed as a corporate governance petition to inspect books and records, it is "a transparent attempt to exert agenda-driven pressure against an independent media organization" and an effort to chill journalism protected by the First Amendment. The paper said it will defend against the suit vigorously.
The 48-page complaint argues that the Times repeatedly published materially false details about the conflict and that "journalistic standards have been weaponized within the company to serve the personal agendas of unchecked editors." The case rests largely on the account of an unnamed former employee, a Jewish worker at the Times video desk, who the petitioners say first raised concerns about prejudiced reporting in 2019 and later took them to human resources. According to the petitioners, she raised concerns about antisemitism and bias against Israel at least 15 times before her departure earlier this year. They allege that a human resources response told her, "If you don't like our values here, maybe you should go find a place whose values align with yours," and that her desk supervisor said it was "not your job to be the ombudsman of the New York Times," a position the company eliminated in 2017.
The groups also point to specific coverage, including a 2023 header that they describe as "flagrantly false" for stating that Gaza deaths surpassed "any Arab loss in wars in [the] past 40 years." The Times corrected that headline six days later. The petitioners say they do not seek to "review, second-guess, or override any editorial judgment," but to fulfill their shareholder responsibility to ensure the paper's brand is not harmed by prejudicial reporting, and they argue the board must verify that its controls against such risks operate as needed.
A Times spokesperson, Charlie Stadtlander, rejected the filing. "This lawsuit has no merit and was brought for an improper purpose," he said, adding that although it is framed as a corporate governance petition to inspect books and records, it is "a transparent attempt to exert agenda-driven pressure against an independent media organization" and an effort to chill journalism protected by the First Amendment. The paper said it will defend against the suit vigorously.
Go deeper than the headline
Research every firm in this story, track the ones that matter and get the daily briefing — free for 7 days.