Two months after the New York Times published a damning investigation into its workplace culture, Amazon is fighting back.
In a blog post on Medium published Monday morning, Amazon spokesperson Jay Carney claims that the Times' reporters Jodi Kantor and David Streitfeld failed to check the accuracy of the anecdotes in the piece.
Advertisement
"Had the reporters checked their facts, the story they published would have been a lot less sensational, a lot more balanced, and, let’s be honest, a lot more boring," he writes. "It might not have merited the front page, but it would have been closer to the truth."
The Times' executive editor, Dean Baquet, tore apart Carney's post in his own blog on Medium. Kantor and Streitfeld spoke with more than 100 current and former Amazon employees, Baquet said. Nothing in Carney's latest response refutes their claims, he writes, adding, "This story was based on dozens of interviews. And any reading of the responses leaves no doubt that this was an accurate portrait."
Carney refused to let the Times get the last word, though. Later on Monday, he shot back at Baquet"thanking" him for his response and sticking to his point that the Times failed to thoroughly fact-check its sources.
The back-and-forth drew a wave of critics on Twitter, fed up with the petty feuding.
Please for the love of all that is good just stop. The article didn't make me stop using Amazon but this might. https://t.co/gdYNWJ97lJ
Two months is an awfully long time to take in responding to a newspaper story. Especially one as big as the Times' piece, a brutal portrayal of a Hobbesian workplace at Amazon that generated a raft of think pieces, hot takes and blog posts from current and former employees.
At the time, Amazon CEO Jeff Bezos defended his company, but only in vague terms, not addressing the specifics of the story. The demanding chief executive asked employees to let him know if they saw any problems at the retailer. He said there was "zero tolerance" for a lack of empathy there. (In other words, he has no empathy for anyone without empathy.)
Back then, Carney, who previously served as White House press secretary, said he was unable to track down some of the employees quoted in the piece.
In his blog on Monday, Carney partially explained the delay by saying that the company's goal was to get the Times to correct its story.
Advertisement
"We presented the Times with our findings several weeks ago, hoping they might take action to correct the record," Carney writes. "They haven’t, which is why we decided to write about it ourselves."
Carney offers details on four employees that the Times quoted in the piece. In particular, Carney claims that the man who said that Amazon workers cry at their desk -- a damning often-quoted assertion -- was fired from the company for "defraud[ing] vendors." Carney's account is disputed by the former employee, Baquet writes, adding that there was no formal accusation of wrongdoing.
Carney explains that one woman who told the Times she didn't sleep for four days to complete a project, chose to do so.
Carney also claims that Kantor misled Amazon about the focus of the piece. "[T]his story will express that Amazon has a somewhat counterintuitive theory of management that really works," Carney quotes Kantor as telling the company.
Baquet writes that this claim is particularly disingenuous.
We have reviewed notes from Ms. Kantor’s communications with your team. The topics discussed relatively early on included Amazon’s reputation as a difficult place to work, social cohesion, complaints of a culture of criticism and other worker concerns that were emerging from the reporting.
I should point out that you said to me that you always assumed this was going to be a tough story, so it is hard to accept that Amazon was expecting otherwise.
A few days after the Times' story published, the paper's public editor criticized the piece for its reliance on anecdotes to paint its picture of Amazon but acknowledged that no facts reported were in question.
This post has been updated with Dean Baquet's response to Jay Carney's critique of the Times story, and with Carney's response to that response.
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
It's Another Trump-Biden Showdown — And We Need Your Help
The Future Of Democracy Is At Stake
Our 2024 Coverage Needs You
Your Loyalty Means The World To Us
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
The 2024 election is heating up, and women's rights, health care, voting rights, and the very future of democracy are all at stake. Donald Trump will face Joe Biden in the most consequential vote of our time. And HuffPost will be there, covering every twist and turn. America's future hangs in the balance. Would you consider contributing to support our journalism and keep it free for all during this critical season?
HuffPost believes news should be accessible to everyone, regardless of their ability to pay for it. We rely on readers like you to help fund our work. Any contribution you can make — even as little as $2 — goes directly toward supporting the impactful journalism that we will continue to produce this year. Thank you for being part of our story.
It's official: Donald Trump will face Joe Biden this fall in the presidential election. As we face the most consequential presidential election of our time, HuffPost is committed to bringing you up-to-date, accurate news about the 2024 race. While other outlets have retreated behind paywalls, you can trust our news will stay free.
But we can't do it without your help. Reader funding is one of the key ways we support our newsroom. Would you consider making a donation to help fund our news during this critical time? Your contributions are vital to supporting a free press.
As Americans head to the polls in 2024, the very future of our country is at stake. At HuffPost, we believe that a free press is critical to creating well-informed voters. That's why our journalism is free for everyone, even though other newsrooms retreat behind expensive paywalls.
Our journalists will continue to cover the twists and turns during this historic presidential election. With your help, we'll bring you hard-hitting investigations, well-researched analysis and timely takes you can't find elsewhere. Reporting in this current political climate is a responsibility we do not take lightly, and we thank you for your support.
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. Would you consider becoming a regular HuffPost contributor?
Dear HuffPost Reader
Thank you for your past contribution to HuffPost. We are sincerely grateful for readers like you who help us ensure that we can keep our journalism free for everyone.
The stakes are high this year, and our 2024 coverage could use continued support. If circumstances have changed since you last contributed, we hope you'll consider contributing to HuffPost once more.