NY Times reporter filed HR complaint because editor threatened to ‘kill' him over story length
The latest headlines from our reporters across the US sent straight to your inbox each weekday Your briefing on the latest headlines from across the US
A New York Times reporter got into an 'epic blow-up' with his editor over a recent story about Harvard that resulted in the reporter filing a human resources complaint because he felt the editor threatened to 'kill' him if his initial draft was too long.
Before the Times published a triple-bylined report last month about some of Harvard's most prominent donors wanting to 'strike a deal' rather than fight the Trump administration, the high-stakes nature of the story resulted in tensions that boiled over as the deadline approached.
The incident was first reported by the Breaker newsletter. The Independent , meanwhile, was able to corroborate Breaker's report with three additional sources.
'According to two people familiar with the matter, [reporter Rob] Copeland and the New York Times business editor Ellen Pollock had an epic blow-up before the Harvard story ran,' Breaker noted. 'It resulted in a HR complaint about a 'death threat' and…Copeland taking time out from the paper.'
Copeland, the author of a bestselling book on famed Wall Street hedge-fund manager Ray Dalio, had drawn the ire of Pollock over delays in the story, prompting her to call him and his editor, Michael Corkery, into her office to hash it out. The story was seen as especially sensitive within the Times as many of the paper's reporters and alumni attended the prestigious Ivy League school. New York Times reporter Rob Copeland went to HR after editor Ellen Pollock said she'd 'kill' him if his draft on a high-stakes Harvard story was over 2000 words. (Getty Images)
According to sources familiar with the situation, Pollock yelled at Copeland for not staying on task and following her directions, eventually resulting in her telling the reporter that she would 'kill' him, Corkery, and herself if his draft came in over 2,000 words. Read More M&S marks 20 years of Gastropub range with Tom Kerridge ad
The tense argument and aftermath soon became the talk of the Grey Lady's newsroom, with one version spreading throughout the halls that threats of shooting were made during the heated dispute, though our sources note that this was not accurate.
For the most part, Times sources that spoke to The Independent indicated that Pollock was almost certainly joking when she issued her supposed 'death threat' to Copeland, something that isn't out of character for the highly respected journalist. At the same time, many reporters at the paper were 'baffled' that Copeland escalated the matter to HR.
'Ellen is a great journalist with a very direct approach, and most people who work for her understand that it's in the service of getting the best story,' one staffer said.
'Yes, obviously there was no way that Ellen was going to pull off a murder-suicide at The Times without clearing it with the masthead first,' the same staffer snarked when asked about the nature of Pollock's 'threat' to Copeland.
In the end, it was apparent that Copeland didn't see the humor in Pollock's and told her that she had committed an 'HR violation' and promptly filed a complaint. In the end, the veteran editor apologized.
' The Times is committed to fostering a productive and supportive workplace, and takes seriously all matters related to how our staff works together,' a New York Times spokesperson said in a statement.
As for the final product, the story – which Copeland co-wrote with Maureen Farrell and Michael Schmidt – came in at 2,282 words. 'Copeland, Corkery and Pollock remained alive at the time of our publication,' Breaker cheekily noted in their report. Read More Craft Media appoints Media Week Podcast host head of planning
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Yahoo
22 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Letter: Harvard is hardly like most other American universities
The guest editorial 'Persecuting Harvard could affect others' (Reading Eagle, June 3) commented on the antisemitism problems Harvard University has tolerated. It seems like Harvard must agree with the protesters. I've read reports of appalling things happening there. Jewish and Muslim students are harassed, bullied and assaulted. Racial slurs are shouted at them. Harvard has a bullying and harassment policy, so why do its leaders not enforce it? The solution to all the antisemitism is this: No matter who the offending or recipient students are (even if the offending one is related to a big-money donor), enforce the policy. If a student is assaulted, call the police and expel the offender. If protesters damage college or personal property, arrest and expel them. The editorial argues that Harvard is like any other college. It is not. Joyce Maurer Spring Township
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Harvard Gains More Allies In Its Lawsuit Against Trump Administration
Several more parties have announced their support for Harvard University's lawsuit against the Trump administration's freezing of more than $2 billion in federal grant money. Last week, 18 of the nation's leading research universities requested that a federal judge allow them to file a legal brief supporting Harvard's lawsuit to recover the funding being withheld by the Trump administration. That request was granted. Now, several more institutions, higher education organizations and coalitions —including teaching hospitals, Harvard alums, and state attorneys general — are coming forward to file amicus curiae (or 'friend of the court') briefs in support of the nation's oldest and wealthiest university. Here's a quick summary of four of the more noteworthy filings. Six more institutions have joined the original 18 universities that requested that Judge Allison D. Burroughs, who's presiding over the federal lawsuit, allow them to file an amicus brief. On Monday, that coalition filed a 19-page amicus brief, that lays out how funding cuts for scientific research endangers a 'longstanding, mutually beneficial arrangement between universities and the American public. Terminating funding disrupts ongoing projects, ruins experiments and datasets, destroys the careers of aspiring scientists, and deters investment in the long-term research that only the academy—with federal funding—can pursue, threatening the pace of progress and undermining American leadership in the process.' Signing the brief were: American University; Boston University; Brown University; California Institute of Technology; Colorado State University; Dartmouth College; Georgetown University; Johns Hopkins University; Massachusetts Institute of Technology; Michigan State University; Oregon State University; Princeton University; Rice University; Rutgers University; Stanford University; Tufts University; University of Delaware; University of Denver; University of Maryland, Baltimore; University of Maryland, College Park; University of Oregon; University of Pennsylvania; University of Pittsburgh; and Yale University. Attorneys General Also on Monday, a group of 21 attorneys general filed an amicus brief in support of a summary judgment in Harvard's favor. They argue that, in addition to endangering Harvard's research, the funding freeze threatens the economies and health of their states. Massachusetts, California, Colorado, Connecticut, Delaware, the District of Columbia, Hawai'i, Illinois, Maine, Maryland, Michigan, Minnesota, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, New York, Oregon, Rhode Island, Vermont, Washington and Wisconsin were the amici states filing the brief. They wrote that, 'beyond threatening current jobs and businesses, such a freeze would halt career development for promising new scientists and debilitate the pipeline for future innovators in Amici States. It would also prevent research into lifesaving medicines and transformative technologies with potential to improve the health and life of Amici State residents. In short, the federal government's current attack on research universities is, in multiple respects, an attack on the states themselves.' A dozen Boston-area teaching hospitals filed their own amicus brief claiming that the grant terminations at Harvard 'will have the consequence of threatening the Hospitals' work to continually advance medical science.' According to the hospitals, 'the funding cuts will have the unintended, yet real, consequence of damaging the foundation upon which the Hospitals develop medical breakthroughs for their patients. Basic science research—often conducted at universities like Harvard—enables hospitals to do clinical research and develop breakthrough treatments or cures for disease. The Hospitals expand on the insights derived from the basic science research to launch clinical trials, and ultimately, treat and cure patients. The termination of Harvard's federal research grants threatens to stunt future discoveries and medical advances.' Former Harvard students have also joined the fray. More than 12,000 Harvard alumni filed a 14-page brief, condemning the 'Government's reckless and unlawful attempts to assert control over the core functions of Harvard and its fellow institutions of higher education.' The alumni include individuals from Harvard's graduating classes for every single year from 1950 to 2025, and they represent all 50 states, D.C., U.S. territories, and dozens of countries around the world. 'The Government's escalating attacks—and this case—are about much more than funding. The Government strikes at the very core of Harvard: the longstanding practices and values of openness, free inquiry, and mutual respect, and its founding commitment to veritas—the quest for truth above all,' the brief states. And the alumni contend that 'the Government's end goal is to narrow our freedoms to learn, teach, think, and act, and to claim for itself the right to dictate who may enjoy those freedoms.' Harvard has asked that Judge Burroughs grant a summary judgment in the case before September 3, claiming that after that deadline, the administration will argue that it can't reinstate the frozen funds. Oral arguments on the matter are scheduled for July 21.
Forbes
an hour ago
- Forbes
Forbes Daily: Newsom Calls Trump Protest Response A ‘Perilous Moment'
When President Donald Trump was inaugurated, a slate of billionaires stood behind him. Now, a small number of the country's wealthiest are standing against him. Walmart heiress Christy Walton, one of America's richest women—worth an estimated $19.4 billion—paid for a full-page ad in the New York Times calling on readers to 'mobilize' this Saturday, the same day Trump is scheduled to host a military birthday parade in Washington, D.C. The words 'No Kings' appear at the top of Walton's ad, an apparent reference to a political organization of the same name that is organizing nationwide demonstrations this weekend. Trump has deployed the National Guard and Marines for protests in Los Angeles, and suggested anyone who protests the parade will be met with 'very big force.' Though Walton doesn't have a role in running Walmart, the retailer has already been caught in the crosshairs of Trump's trade war: The president threatened the nation's largest retailer after its CEO warned of tariff-related price increases. Middle East Images/AFP via Getty Images Los Angeles Mayor Karen Bass on Tuesday night ordered an overnight curfew covering a large portion of the city's Downtown area, while California Gov. Gavin Newsom attacked President Donald Trump in a televised address, describing his decision to send military forces to handle the protests against immigration raids as a 'perilous moment' for democracy. Earlier Tuesday, a judge turned down Newsom's request for an emergency ruling that would have blocked federal troop deployment in Los Angeles. Digital bank Chime will debut on public markets Thursday, and many industry experts expect its stock to pop as one of the fintech industry's largest consumer-facing businesses. But the firm faces long-term challenges, including growing its customer base more profitably (as well as retaining existing customers), controlling lending losses and combating fraud. Defense tech giant Anduril recently raised a mega funding round led by Founders Fund, which values the company at more than $30 billion, making the company's chairman and cofounder Trae Stephens a billionaire. Booming investor appetite for funding military startups has helped make Stephens the latest entry to a group of billionaires who are making a fortune selling weapons systems to the government. AP Photo/Yuri Gripas Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent has always enjoyed displaying his wealth, buying and selling at least 20 homes over the years, but life wasn't always as luxurious for the South Carolinian who started working at 9 years old. Though it's difficult to pinpoint, Forbes estimates Bessent is worth about $600 million, and while he struggled to generate big returns at his own hedge fund, he's found success working for big personalities like George Soros and now President Donald Trump. Elon Musk expressed regret about some of the posts he made on X last week, marking a significant climb down by the billionaire who triggered a feud with the president last week by bashing his signature spending bill. The battle took a toll on Tesla's stock, but shares of the EV maker rose in premarket trading early on Wednesday after Musk's apology. Khaby Lame, TikTok's most-followed person, fled the U.S. after he was detained by ICE at Harry Reid International Airport in Las Vegas for 'overstaying the terms of his visa,' according to the Department of Homeland Security. The Senegalese-Italian creator's detention comes amid Trump's broader immigration crackdown and nationwide protests of ICE. Lame has more than 162 million followers and was the tenth-highest paid on Forbes' 2024 Top Creators list, having earned an estimated $20 million. Alice Lagarde for Forbes; Jared C. Tilton/Getty Images;; Dylan Buell/Stringer/Getty Images Despite American golfer Scottie Scheffler's recent dominance, the title of the world's highest-paid golfer goes to Spaniard Jon Rahm, as his decision to defect from the PGA Tour to Saudi-backed LIV Golf continues to pay dividends. Still, LIV's spending spree has seemingly come to an end, and without a fresh set of lucrative signing bonuses, Forbes found the world's 10 best-paid golfers are collectively making less—an estimated $612 million, down 10% from 2024's $678 million. President Donald Trump's attack on higher education is leading schools to take on new debt: 99 colleges and universities have issued $20.8 billion in public debt so far in 2025, up from $17 billion by 71 institutions at the same time last year, data shows. The elite schools that have been directly impacted by the president's assault are beefing up their liquidity, but smaller colleges are also entering the bond market. Levine Leichtman Capital Partners Lauren Leichtman spent four decades building a super successful private equity firm with her husband, Arthur Levine. But the couple's latest purchase is the San Diego Wave pro women's soccer team for an estimated $113 million last October. Leichtman knows a thing or two about good investments. In 1984, she cofounded Beverly Hills, California-based private equity firm Levine Leichtman Capital Partners alongside her husband, investing in small businesses that needed money and targeting successful founders who had built companies with $30 million to $40 million in revenues. Over the next 40 years, the couple built their small wife-and-husband shop into an $11 billion (assets) buyout firm with blue-chip investors ranging from the California Public Employees' Retirement System to publicly-traded asset manager Hamilton Lane. While they stepped back from day-to-day management in 2020, Leichtman and Levine still own the firm, which makes up the bulk of their fortunes. Add in their private investments, real estate and the San Diego Wave—the team is now worth an estimated $165 million—and Forbes estimates that Leichtman and Levine are each worth $1.3 billion, ranking Leichtman 26th on Forbes' 2025 list of America's Richest Self-Made Women. Throughout the years, Leichtman and Levine have stuck to what they know best. They invest in businesses with positive cash flow. They look for experienced entrepreneurs and management teams who want to stay on to run the company and keep an ownership stake after the deal is closed. And they use a combination of debt and equity to ensure regular cash payments from interest on the debt. WHY IT MATTERS 'In an industry dominated by men, Leichtman is the only woman to become a billionaire in private equity, according to Forbes' wealth rankings,' says Forbes staff writer Giacomo Tognini. 'She stands out as a pioneer in building one of America's most successful middle market private equity firms that has made profitable investments in well-known companies including restaurant franchises Tropical Smoothie Cafe and Wetzel's Pretzels, as well as scoring big exits in industries ranging from pipe fittings to air quality control.' MORE America's Richest Self-Made Women For the fourth consecutive month, fewer Canadians traveled to the U.S. in May, which cements trouble for the travel industry and economy. International travel to the U.S. is expected to drop this year: 38%: The drop in Canadians taking road trips into the U.S. in May compared to last year, according to new data from Statistics Canada Roughly 1 in 4: The share of all foreign travelers to the U.S. that Canadians make up 9%: The expected decline in U.S. international arrivals in 2025 Burnout is a common challenge, especially among entrepreneurs, but just getting more rest and practicing self-care probably won't get at the root of the problem. Figure out what's draining to you, or blocking your progress, and work toward eliminating these factors from your day-to-day. Say no to things that don't serve your growth and create goals that excite you. The key is rediscovering your purpose. She may not be a household name, but Senate Parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough could play a vital role in the contents of the budget bill making its way through Congress. What year did the first person officially serve in the nonpartisan job? Check your answer. Thanks for reading! This edition of Forbes Daily was edited by Sarah Whitmire and Chris Dobstaff.
