Tl;dr: Some topics are suggested for the New York Times’ technology newsletter that are perhaps more lively and self-aware than their usual fare
Despite regular skirmishing between “Silicon Valley” and the self-appointed hall monitors from the New York Times’ seemingly merged Style and Technology sections, the Times’ daily OnTech newsletter flies beneath the radar. Perhaps eluding scrutiny by virtue of its sheer banality, “On the Evils of Tech” would be a more apt title, as it reliably if unimaginatively finds a negative light to shine on technology.
OnTech could easily be reduced to a set of short codes: #1 – Social networks are really, really, really, really abominable (often accompanied by a bracing whiff of gatekeeper nostalgia), #3 – “Yay privacy!” (boo Big Tech!), #6 – “Antitrust shall be our salvation” (op-eds alone have not yet proven sufficient), #8 – The gig economy? Also problematic, etc. Future columns could just publish a number and save everyone’s time.
Positive or optimistic columns are rare, acknowledgment that technology has benefits grudging, and pretensions of balance and objectivity both strained and perfunctory: “Many of these are worthwhile efforts. We should all believe in the power of innovation to solve problems. But…” is characteristic.
Despite the morally superior tone, OnTech is very much a mundane digital marketing exercise: a link-laden daily email newsletter intended to drive traffic. Click pandering lurking beneath a holier-than-thou patina. That awkward union exemplifies the Times’ frequent hypocrisy and lack of self-awareness in its technology coverage.
The critical – and even the persistently negative – take on technology falls well within the Fourth Estate’s job description. But this post is prompted by the fact the Times itself resides in a glass house on many of the same issues for which they incessantly and self-righteously condemn tech companies. Those concerns include antitrust, diversity, misinformation, moderation, online advertising, privacy, subscription business practices, amongst others. One could almost do a daily newsletter on the evils of the Times…
It isn’t clear if the editorial staff maintain their monomaniacal Manichean mindset out of unironic obliviousness or a deeply cynical understanding of how the institution they work for now really works (if you read just one link in this post, let it be that one). But the unavoidable conclusion is the Times is not even remotely a neutral observer of technology, has its own self-serving agenda, and is as captive to business incentives as any company they cover.
With that preamble, here are a few suggested topics for OnTech that would liven up the newsletter without sacrificing the critical slant:
Moderation in Pursuit of Pot Roast is No Virtue
Why can’t social networks moderate speech on their platforms? Why can’t the New York Times moderate its 77,000 member cooking group? Is all speech political speech or do guacamole variants just bring out the worst in people?
Competing with Tech: A Conversation with the CEO of the New York Times
The Times’ CEO says “we are trying to more firmly establish the Times as a world-class digital product and tech company.” What moonshots are under way to make up for not inventing the search engine or social network? Should a conflict-of-interest disclaimer accompany every story about technology?
Inconsistencies Surrounding Use of the R-Word at the New York Times
Ben Smith is the Times’ columnist for media in all its multitudes, but is himself absent in one important media format. He lacks an RSS feed. Even faxing-it-in Times columnist and renowned parody of himself Thomas Friedman has an RSS feed. Will the Times join Google in the RSS Hall of Shame?
Privacy for Me but Not for Thee: A Deep Dive into the New York Times’ Army of Ad Trackers
Online privacy has no greater champion than the Great and Powerful New York Times Editorial Board. Yet their grandiose pronouncements go unheeded even within the Times, whose own reporters found “news sites were the worst” for privacy. The Times deploys an army of surveillance trackers from its Big Tech pals as well as less principled adtech reprobates.
How I Work: A Study of Stated vs. Revealed Preferences
Our columnist (reluctantly) reveals the technology used to produce the newsletter, even during a global pandemic, and offers advice on how to best avoid confronting bitter realities.
Who’s Really Killing Local Newspapers? Facebook and Google or the New York Times?
Should people who live in glass houses throw antitrust stones? Lets do some data journalism:
In Which We Try to Unsubscribe from the New York Times
Horrible companies make it extremely hard to unsubscribe from their services. Surely the saintly New York Times doesn’t behave this way?
Crossword Puzzle Constructors of the World Unite!
Cooking and Crosswords subscriptions are the Times’ fastest growing business, leading to the observation:
“Most New York Times writers, the august authors of ‘the first draft of history’, would do more for their hallowed institution’s finances if they dedicated themselves to writing chocolate-chip cookie recipes and crossword puzzles.”
The lucrative Crosswords franchise is built on the back of gig worker puzzle constructors with no health care, labor protections, or corporate-issued thesauri. The Times openly admits its payments “still don’t truly reflect the time, effort and skill involved in producing high-quality work” and that it plays constructors off against one another: “The competition is fierce. We get 10 or more submissions for every one that we accept.”
GPT-3 Wrote Half These Columns – Can You Tell Which Half?
Big reveal: every other OnTech newsletter is machine generated. The hottest question in AI: can algorithms be banal?