A newsroom editorial board is a group of journalists and editors who are responsible for determining the direction and policies of a news organization. The board typically consists of “veteran journalists,” who are senior editors and reporters who have extensive experience in journalism and are respected for their expertise in their respective fields. The board is responsible for deciding which news stories to cover, how to cover them, and what editorial position the news organization should take on important issues. The board focuses on editorial pieces on a variety of topics such as politics, economics, environmental, and social issues. The editorial board is a critical component of any reputable news organization, as it helps to ensure that the news coverage and commentary are fair, accurate, and objective. It serves as a check and balance to the reporting done by the newsroom, helping maintain the integrity of the news organization's brand and reputation. Focusing specifically on the New York Times and its editorial board, the public may ask: How is their editorial board structured, and how does this impact the published new articles that are read by the company’s 3.8 million subscribers?

The New York Times was bought in 1896 by Adolph Ochs and the Sulzbergers. A.G. Sulzberger, the sixth member of the Ochs-Sulzberger family to join the New York Times, remains the chairman and head publisher of the news company. He oversees all departments involved in the New York Times and manages what is released to the public. Within the company, the editorial board is separate from the main newsroom and is situated in opinion editorials. Not having the editorial board work in the newsroom is extremely stressed within the organization, as the board uses their own opinions, understandings, and facts to converse and write. The central objective stated in the article, “What Is an Editorial Board?” by James Bennet categorized under Understanding the Times, “... the role of the editorial board is to provide Times readers with a long-range view formed not by one person’s expertise and experience but ballasted by certain institutional values that have evolved across more than 150 years.” The quote suggests that the way to come to a conclusion about an idea is done not individually, but rather collectively as a board of members. Especially since their values uphold “more than 150 years” of experience, which is used as their reasoning to be a trusted source. Therefore, the only way to succeed in hearing different perspectives on challenging subjects is through conversation. But, who is having these conversations in the New York Times editorial board?

The board exists with the intention of creating fluid communication pertaining to debated topics to shed light on aspects to bring to the public. Yet, the question arises of who is on the board and who is being represented or misrepresented. There are currently fourteen journalists and editors on the editorial board. Since its founding, there have consistently been around fifteen to twenty members. Every few years, the New York Times cycles through the members of the board. However, the board has not changed since 2020. All members have renowned biographies stating awards they have won, including Pulitzer Prizes, as well as their attendance at top universities in the United States including Yale, University of Pennsylvania, Harvard, and several more Ivy Leagues. With having an editorial board for opinion editorials, it is important that the readers are getting strategic opinions. These articles impact the audience in a way that will alter their values: either accepting, rejecting, or staying neutral about the opinion piece. Considering the impact the New York Times has on its readers, it is essential to know why these selected members’ viewpoints are deemed reliable. Having the backing of awards and elite colleges helps to verify their credibility, however, it is the diversity of the team’s ideas and beliefs that will create fair angles on controversies. The team meets regularly, around three times a week to discuss what will be presented in upcoming articles, meaning whose opinions will be represented. 

If the New York Times was impacted so greatly by the elections, with declining trust from the readers, as well as not being able to predict what the state of the nation will look like in a year, why is the editorial board conversing about politics and other substantial topics? In January 2020, the New York Times released an article “How and Why Our Editorial Boards Endorse Political Candidates” which explains how the board processes and assesses the presidential candidates to offer their readers a guide about who is the best politician to vote for. The readers must trust and make justified decisions to agree or disagree with the opinion piece. When considering viewers who are not critically news-literate, they are putting blind faith in the editorial board’s collective knowledge. The New York Times editorial board has been releasing articles endorsing presidential candidates since its founding. As stated in the article, “our goal [as an editorial board] is to present an informed view through reasoned analysis, open debate and what Adolph S. Ochs…once called ‘the free exercise of a sound conscience.’” Each member of the editorial board has prior experience and through deliberation, the New York Times tries to provide ethical perspectives. In Bennet’s article, he goes on to say, “In general, it reaches its conclusions by consensus, though in matters where there is deep disagreement we sometimes have to call a vote.” This prompts the question, if the editorial board must vote on what to write, why are there not two articles stating both opinions?

As readers call attention to the trust in the press and the justifications behind the language used in the articles, the New York Times has a plan to make reforms in order to be more diverse. It is up to the people who read The New York Times and the people who work in the organization to address the editorial board. In order for their processes of debating and concluding to properly reach their audience, the company must understand there is a problem. If The New York Times’ audience is reading what is specifically catered to them, readers need to reflect on what information they are digesting. Is the information news based on opinions and research or is it for capitalistic purposes? Opinion editorials will obviously be opinionated, yet how this group of educated individuals decides to communicate these opinions will prove if a change has been made. Although there is a handbook on ethical journalism, there are no real guidelines on the ethics and policies of the editorial board. In order to change, it is necessary for there to be a protocol for the editorial board. In the statement of “The New York Times Editorial Board”, their guiding values say that “... societies must struggle to reconcile these values in order to succeed.” This statement and others, like “free and fair,” must be upheld within The New York Times facility and within their own writings. This entails having better reform along the guidelines for editorial boards, including how one becomes an active member of the board and the process of coming to a conclusion about a heated topic. With diversifying the New York Times, the editorial board and the company as a whole will benefit from having better coverage while gaining back the trust of its audience.