Shop Paper #21: Why is Forbes so afraid of editorial integrity?

December 1, 2023

Greetings--

Happy holidays if you're celebrating one this time of year. Here's a summary of out latest bargaining sessions with management.

When we sat down at the bargaining table in 2021, the first proposal we put on the table was editorial integrity. It’s one of the issues that matters most to the unit, and the ethical bedrock of all the work we do.

Yet despite the issue’s importance, it took over a year and a half before management was ready to discuss editorial integrity. Forbes vice president and editorial counsel Jessica Bohrer joined part of our latest negotiations at the NewsGuild of New York’s offices on Dec. 1, 2023. The all-day session was probably one of the most productive ones we’ve had (as well as the one with the least amount of yelling from Forbes’ attorney Patrick Collins). But despite verbally agreeing on many areas of common ground on editorial integrity, Forbes management refused to codify what it claims are shared values in a tentative agreement.

What are they so afraid of?

Editorial integrity

Twenty months after the union presented management with our proposal on editorial integrity, one of our members’ top priorities, Forbes returned a counter-proposal. Management struck much of what the union proposed, including specific standards, a requirement that management obtain the prior consent of the reporter before issuing a retraction, writers’ right to remove their bylines, better differentiation between editorial and branded content, the need to notify the guild of new material investors in the company within 10 days, and the creation of an editorial-standards committee, comprised equally of management and union representatives, that would make binding recommendations to ensure editorial integrity. 

In the subsequent discussion, both sides agreed that editorial content should be free of influence from third parties. Bohrer stated that management fundamentally agrees with these concepts in the union’s proposal but didn’t think that such guidelines belong in a collective bargaining agreement (CBA). Management also claimed that its vague editorial standards are sufficient, as are its disclosures about sponsored content, as long as they meet what’s legally required. It’s a weak and unacceptable stance given chief content officer Randall Lane’s previous remarks that he wished our union contract would go beyond the bare minimum seen at other publications.

The union is fighting for clear, enforceable guidelines and accountability in the CBA to protect editorial decisions from external interference. Our focus is on ensuring transparency and upholding journalistic integrity, but Forbes’ reluctance to include specific standards in the agreement, even ones that are implemented in most other newsrooms, is a significant problem. We believe firmly in the necessity of solid, documented policies to improve and maintain the independence and credibility of our newsroom. We also believe an editorial committee and clearer processes to editorial integrity concerns will empower both unit members and their managers to produce high-quality, high-integrity work.

Flexible time off

In the previous bargaining session on Nov. 17, management told the union that there was a Dec. 1 deadline for us to agree on a flexible time-off policy if it was to be implemented for 2024. The bargaining committee consulted with you, our shop members, and found concern and a general lack of enthusiasm for switching from the status quo. In the Dec. 1 negotiations, we shared that sentiment with Forbes management. But we said we’d be willing to accept some of its proposal on flexible time off if it was part of a package that also included things we cared about: our revised proposal on hours and overtime (an area intertwined with FTO) and our previously shared editorial integrity proposal. The bargaining committee worked hard to present such a package that would deliver key areas of focus for the unit while compromising on an area of high priority to management. Management, however, rejected the package concept, with its attorney Collins stating the topics weren’t related and it didn’t want to rush through editorial integrity. 

Management has had over a year to review editorial integrity. Where’’s the rush?

We do feel like we made progress on FTO and hours and overtime. Despite management saying it saw no need to revisit those issues until the end of 2024 (which would be three years into contract negotiations), we will fight to make progress on them in the near future, even if they would not implement changes until the following year.

Diversity Equity Inclusion and Belonging

The union also provided a counter proposal on diversity, equity, inclusion, and belonging (DEIB) for management to review before our next meeting. We know this is also a topic of high importance to the unit, and worked to address management’s concerns with our previous proposal, without sacrificing the values that matter to our unit. We demand that management meet us in turn so that we can reach a tentative agreement on this key topic.

While we made progress at the latest bargaining session, let’s be clear: this fight isn’t won at the bargaining table. We win when we all step up and speak out, collectively. We’ll be in touch with next steps soon.

Have any questions about the proposals or anything related to bargaining? Reach out to anyone on the bargaining committee.

Want to get more involved? We’re always looking for new stewards or BC members. Contact Unit Chair Andrea Murphy: andreadmurphy@gmail.com to learn more.

Solidarity,

Your Bargaining Committee

Zach Everson

Alex Konrad

Andrea Murphy

Hank Tucker