Florida Pension Fund Sues New York Times for Internal Documents on Israel Coverage

The Florida State Board of Administration, acting as the pension fund for Florida's state employees, and the National Center for Public Policy Research have filed a lawsuit in New York State Supreme Court demanding access to internal documents from The New York Times' board of directors. The lawsuit alleges that the board fails to adequately oversee the newspaper's ethics policies, particularly concerning its coverage of Israel and the war in Gaza.

The suit is partly based on the testimony of a former Jewish employee who claimed the newspaper exhibited anti-Israel bias. It also cites a recent Yale University study suggesting the Times' coverage of the war lacks balance and may distort readers' perceptions of reality. The plaintiffs, who collectively own approximately 161,000 shares in the Times' parent company, seek to examine how the board supervises the paper's adherence to its ethical standards, asserting this is a matter of corporate governance, not editorial judgment.

Florida's Attorney General, Ashley Moody, is representing the pension fund, while the National Jewish Advocacy Center is representing the research institute. The lawsuit requests basic documents such as committee charters, board agendas, and ethical guidelines. The plaintiffs reserve the right to seek broader materials, including records of complaint handling and information on the Sulzberger family's control over director appointments, if necessary.

The New York Times has previously rejected similar requests, calling them a "transparent pretext" and a "coordinated harassment." The lawsuit highlights specific instances of controversial coverage, including a May 11th opinion piece by Nicholas Kristof alleging sexual violence against Palestinians, which drew protests and a threat of a libel suit from Israel. The Times' executive editor, Joe Kahn, acknowledged that the newsroom might not have produced the same piece but defended the opinion section's editorial process.

Further examples cited include an unusual editor's note in October 2023 regarding the Al-Ahli hospital explosion, a correction about a photo of a Gaza child, and the removal of a sentence from a report after a pro-Israel group's complaint. The suit also references a study by Professors Eitan Gilboa and Lilach Segan from Bar-Ilan University, which found that 48 out of 72 acknowledged errors by the Times between October 2023 and June 2024 were related to Israel.

The former employee's testimony details numerous complaints she filed since 2019 regarding alleged anti-Israel bias within her team, including the rehiring of a Gaza videographer previously fired for praising Hitler. She claims her supervisors dismissed her concerns, with one suggesting she find employment elsewhere if she disagreed with the paper's values. The lawsuit also mentions a study by Professor Adar Pinhas from Yale School of Management, which found that while the Times' coverage of the war may be influenced by the difficulty of obtaining information from Gaza, the resulting imbalance could shape reader opinions inaccurately.