Federal civil rights law prohibits discrimination on the basis of race and also sex. Quite obviously, these protections have to apply to people of all races and sexes, even white males.
Someone alert The New York Times, which stands accused of discriminating against a white male employee seeking a promotion. The U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has filed a lawsuit on the employee’s behalf, contending that the Times “chose not to promote a well-qualified white male employee because of his race and/or sex.”
In a statement, The Times denied the charge.
“The New York Times categorically rejects the politically motivated allegations brought by the Trump administration’s EEOC,” said Danielle Rhoades Ha, a Times spokesperson. “Our employment practices are merit-based and focused on recruiting and promoting the best talent in the world. We will defend ourselves vigorously.”
Given President Donald Trump’s well-documented contempt for the mainstream media and his demonstrated track record of suing media companies for crossing him, critics of the administration will undoubtedly conclude that this is a politically motivated attack on a disfavored foe. Even so, the EEOC does present information within the suit that is suggestive of discrimination. If the races of the involved parties were reversed, it would probably strike many people as a slam dunk.
The employee, a white male, and an editor at the Times, had applied for a more senior position as a deputy real estate editor. He did not get the job, despite extensive relevant experience, including with real estate news, according to the lawsuit.
This is not dispositive on its own, of course. However, the lawsuit also claims that he did not even make it to the final round of interviews, losing out to “a white female, a black male, an Asian female, and a multiracial female.” The candidate who did receive the position, the “multiracial female,” did not meet the stated qualifications for the position, since she did not have experience in real estate journalism. Nevertheless, the hiring manager sent an email to herself signaling an intent to choose this person before even interviewing her.
These facts become more concerning in light of the Times‘ stated desire to increase the number of minority and female employees in leadership positions. The lawsuit cites various diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) plans, as well as the Times‘ 2021 proposal, “A Call to Action,” which lamented that “people of color—and particularly women of color—remain notably underrepresented in its leadership.” The proposal explicitly endorsed the idea of gradually replacing existing leadership with women of color, to the specific exclusion of “white and unspecified” ethnicities. Leaders at the Times would be judged “by how well they ‘create pathways’ for a ‘diverse’ group of deputies to succeed them,” according to the proposal.
Basically, the Times published a manifesto announcing that hiring managers would face pressure to promote underrepresented minorities. The paper took the position that senior leadership would be evaluated on the basis of their success at hiring black, Latino, and female applicants.
So when it came time to hire a deputy real estate editor, the Times did not really consider the white male applicant, despite the fact that he possessed “considerable experience with real estate news, multiple news platforms, and innovative content.” The hiring manager only considered diverse candidates and selected the maximally diverse candidate despite questionable qualifications.
Again, that is the contention of the EEOC and one the Times denies.
New York Magazine, which revealed the alleged identity of the employee who made the complaint, thinks the whole story is ridiculous:
People at the paper say the claim is absurd. “I’m sorry, there are plenty of white guys at the top of the New York Times. Not really something that’s holding you back,” said the reporter. To name one prominent example, Joe Kahn, the paper’s executive editor, is a white male, as are many members of the masthead.
This is a total non sequitur, though. The EEOC is not alleging that the Times has refused to hire any white males for senior leadership positions. The government has claimed that the Times discriminated against this specific employee, passing him over for a promotion due to his race and sex. The existence of other white males in leadership says nothing about what went down with the deputy real estate editor position.
Speaking for myself, I’m not sure how high the burden of proof has to be in such cases; perhaps the Times can plausibly allege there was some other reason to pass over this candidate. I tend to think private employers should have a free hand in hiring and firing decisions and not be overly encumbered by the government. That said, federal civil rights law prohibits private employers from engaging in racial discrimination and sex-based discrimination. As long as discrimination is illegal, these protections should (and must) extend to white males as well, even if that’s not who civil rights attorneys usually have in mind.
One other note: Why is it so common for mainstream news sources to write about lawsuits without including links to the relevant court documents? As far as I could tell, none of the coverage of this story contained the link to the EEOC’s lawsuit. That was true of The Washington Post, The Intercept, Reuters, Axios, and The New York Times.
Why do mainstream media orgs refuse to link to relevant court docs? The EEOC is suing NYT for allegedly discriminating against a white male (!), but you can't just read the suit yourself in any of the coverage from… Washington Post, New York Times, Reuters, Axios, and The…
— Robby Soave (@robbysoave) May 6, 2026
It’s a very common and vexing thing for those of us who would like to read the complaint and form our own judgment. (I linked the document in that post on X, in this article, and again here.)
This Week on Free Media
I am joined by Amber Duke to look at new welfare fraud allegations in Ohio, Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D–Mass.) complaining about Jeff Bezos’ wealth, and more.
Worth Watching
Well, the latest trailer for Christopher Nolan’s The Odyssey is certainly dividing people, to say the latest. I’ve heard plenty of griping about the modern dialogue: Telemachus calling Odysseus his “dad” rather than his “father” was a bit worrisome. I’m mostly just concerned that this will be yet another case of Pazuzu, the demon who eats colors, having his fill. I love Nolan, but his films have become increasingly difficult to see (and also to hear).
The post Did <em>The New York Times</em> Discriminate Against a While Male Employee? appeared first on Reason.com.
from Latest – Reason.com https://ift.tt/ku7CoJz
via IFTTT