NY Times Union Apologizes For ‘Mistake’ Tweet Blasting Bret Stephens For Column Declaring the 1619 Project ‘Failed’

The New York Times Guild apologized on Sunday after denouncing an article from New York Times columnist Bret Stephens.

On Friday, Stephen’s criticized the New York Times’ controversial, but Pulitzer Prize-winning “1619 Project” helmed by Nikole Hannah-Jones — calling it an ambitious project which in “some ways” succeeded, but criticizing its errors of fact and attempt to have the “last word” on history.

Stephens concluded: “the 1619 Project has failed.”

The Twitter account for the New York Times union soon responded, blasting the paper and Stephen’s for the piece.

“It says a lot about an organization when it breaks it’s [sic] own rules and goes after one of it’s [sic] own. The act, like the article, reeks,” the union declared.

The post quickly came under fire on social media — where users also noted that the union for the most prestigious newspaper in America misused “it’s” twice in one sentence — and from the Intercept’s Glenn Greenwald, who wrote that the Guild’s “denunciation was marred by humiliating typos and even more so by creepy and authoritarian censorship demands and petulant appeals to management for enforcement of company ‘rules’ against other journalists.”

“To say that this is bizarre behavior from a union of journalists, of all people, is to woefully understate the case,” he declared, pointing out that journalists typically call for more freedom of expression, not less.

On Sunday, however, the Guild removed its tweet and backtracked.

“We deleted our previous tweet. It was tweeted in error,” they wrote. “We apologize for the mistake.”

We deleted our previous tweet. It was tweeted in error. We apologize for the mistake.

— NYTimesGuild (@NYTimesGuild) October 12, 2020

According to Times media critic Ben Smith, the original tweet was posted by the leader of the chapter — without “any internal discussion” — sparking some furor behind the scenes.

Someone else active in the Times Union tells me that a leader of the chapter, who runs the account, tweeted about the Stephens column without any internal discussion, causing a furor in Slack and drawing heated objections from others in the Guild, and leading to this: https://t.co/7LPoulxaa7

— Ben Smith (@benyt) October 12, 2020

Shortly afterwards on Sunday night, Times publisher A.G. Sulzberger defended the 1619 Project in a statement to staff. He insisted that the publication of Stephens’ column does not mean the paper no longer stands behind the project.

Our publisher AG Sulzberger shared this statement on the 1619 Project with employees this evening pic.twitter.com/wu7JeqhY3N

— Jake Silverstein (@jakesilverstein) October 12, 2020

Have a tip for us? tips@mediaite.com