Working at New York Times |

New York Times Overview

Work here? Get a FREE Employer Account
New York, NY (US)
1001 to 5000 employees
Company - Public (NYT)
News Outlets
£1 to £2 billion (GBP) per year


"All the News That's Fit to Print and Post Online" would be a more accurate motto for this media titan. The New York Times Company (The Times Co.) publishes The New York Times, one of the world's most respected ... Read more

New York Times Reviews

  • Helpful (3)

    "Toxic work environment"

    • Work/Life Balance
    • Culture & Values
    • Career Opportunities
    • Comp & Benefits
    • Senior Management
    Former Employee - Advertising Executive in London, England
    Former Employee - Advertising Executive in London, England
    Doesn't Recommend
    Negative Outlook

    I worked at New York Times full-time (More than a year)


    Good pension, healthcare schemes and bonus. Some interesting projects where you are given creative freedom, mainly due to managers being busy climbing the corporate ladder.


    The advertising side of operations in London is a toxic work environment with frequent inequality experienced. There is poor leadership, inadequate communication, a severe lack of support and recognition as well as a worryingly limited duty of care shown to employees. If you are looking for an environment that is diverse, inclusive, mindful, progressive, free of bias, championing self-expression and reflective of the company's ethical journalism across-the-board, this is not the place for you.

    Advice to Management

    Examine practices, internal infrastructure and hiring processes
    Foster a kind and supportive environment
    Listen to and advocate for non-managerial staff
    Address unconscious biases and acknowledge white privilege
    Ensure all staff are paid fairly
    Reduce pay disparities
    Follow CIPD standards of practice in HR
    Introduce 360° feedback

See All 466 Reviews

New York Times Photos

New York Times photo of: Outside NY Times office (Photo thanks to Flickr user harrisj, available under by-nc-sa v2.0)
New York Times photo of: Cubicles
New York Times photo of: New York Times headquarters
New York Times photo of: Dean Baquet speaks to the newsroom.
New York Times photo of: Cafeteria
New York Times photo of: Cubicle
See All PhotosSee All

New York Times Interviews



Getting an Interview

Getting an Interview





    Editorial Interview

    Anonymous Interview Candidate
    No Offer
    Negative Experience
    Average Interview


    I applied through an employee referral. The process took 4 weeks. I interviewed at New York Times in April 2019.


    To begin with, I had an excellent experience interviewing at the NYT. The hiring manager asked great questions and was sharp, communicative and transparent. The process started with a phone screening, and I was then interviewed by the hiring manager in person, along with another senior editor, on-site.

    The interviews seemed to go really well. Both editors seemed to like me and were extremely encouraging. As a next step, I was asked to complete a take-home timed test. I should have declared then that I have test anxiety, but was worried this might reflect poorly on me, even though my anxiety has never hampered my work in a professional setting.

    I performed well on the test, barring minor errors, but submitted it roughly 7-8 minutes late as I'd had an anxiety attack while working on it that set me back a solid 30 minutes or so (the total test time was officially set at 2 hours). When I was told that I was rejected specifically as I'd gone over the allotted time, while disappointed, I completely understood the position of the company and the hiring manager. Though I was qualified for the job, I also understood that there are numerous variables that factor into the hiring process. It was a totally fair decision, and I accepted the rejection gracefully. That wasn't what bothered me about the process.

    I responded to the rejection with an email thanking the editors. I also explained my anxiety situation in the email, which I had *very* carefully drafted with my therapist. I noted that it would be great if the editors could let me know if the company has mechanisms in place to help support candidates like me (ie highly qualified candidates who may suffer from anxiety or other disabilities), for future reference. I did not get a reply, even though three people received the email, including someone from HR. Many months later I sent another email, stating my keenness to keep in touch, without mentioning my anxiety or the test situation at all. Again, I got no response. (Granted, it's possible this email fell through the cracks).

    When it came to the actual hiring decision, I didn't expect to be treated any differently to candidates who do not suffer from similar mental health disorders that may impact their performance on timed tests.

    But I would expect at the very least that the NYT, as such a formidable institution, would have a mechanism in place to at least address or reply to candidates who have experienced similar situations. (I fully acknowledge that I should have declared my anxiety pre-test). My anxiety attack during the test, which was worsened by the lack of response, was actually so severe that it triggered a prolonged bout of Hyperventilation Syndrome which continued unabated for many months.

    On the whole, I was surprised by the turn the situation took. I would hope organisations recognise the importance of being understanding when dealing with candidates who share that they have anxiety or other mental health disorders that may be exacerbated by tests, even if it's after the hiring decision has been made.

    Interview Questions

See All 177 Interviews

New York Times Awards & Accolades

  • Best Companies for Multicultural Women, Working Mother, 2012
  • Best Places to Work for LGBT Equality, Human Rights Campaign, 2010
See More

Work at New York Times? Share Your Experiences

New York Times
  • Star
  • Star
  • Star
  • Star
  • Star
Click to Rate