The Los Angeles Times is reportedly making changes to the output of its left-leaning opinion writers, causing discontent among staff members. Robin Abcarian, Jackie Calmes, and LZ Granderson have been instructed to publish one opinion piece per week instead of their usual two. Abcarian covers politics, culture, and social issues, while Calmes focuses on national politics and policy, and Granderson explores the intersection of sports, culture, and politics.
The decision to reduce the writers’ output is believed to be linked to the owner of the Los Angeles Times, Dr. Patrick Soon-Shiong, attempting to align himself with Republicans and the White House. Soon-Shiong recently offered voluntary buyouts to staff members with over two years of tenure, causing further discontent among the newspaper’s employees.
In a recent interview with the Free Press, Soon-Shiong admitted to taking the “red pill,” a reference to becoming more aligned with Republicans. He expressed regret over the newspaper’s endorsement of Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass, citing “confirmation bias” and “false assumptions” among the staff. These comments infuriated Times staffers, who felt undermined and disheartened by the owner’s remarks.
Despite attempts at damage control by Soon-Shiong, morale at the newspaper remains low. Staff members are in disbelief over the owner’s actions and statements, especially given the dedication of the newsroom during recent events like the wildfires. The timing of the buyout offer and the criticism of the newsroom have left employees feeling unappreciated and undervalued.
In addition to these internal issues, Soon-Shiong has faced backlash from readers and writers for blocking the editorial board from endorsing Kamala Harris in the recent election. This move, along with the incorporation of conservative voices into the editorial board, has led to cancellations of subscriptions and resignations from the editorial staff.
Despite efforts to diversify perspectives on the editorial board, the changes at the Los Angeles Times have created tension and dissatisfaction among staff and readers alike. The future of the newspaper and its editorial direction remain uncertain as the fallout from these decisions continues to unfold.
