New York Times Publisher Defends Journalism Against AI, Trump Pressure

A.G. Sulzberger, who has served as publisher of The New York Times for roughly a decade, sat down with WIRED in late July to discuss the dual pressures reshaping journalism. Nearly three years ago, the Times sued OpenAI and Microsoft, alleging they illegally used New York Times journalism to train their AI models—a copyright infringement case still in discovery, on which the Times is spending upwards of $20 million（約32億円）.

Beyond the courtroom, Sulzberger is navigating what he calls the most aggressive assault on press freedom from a White House in more than a century. The Trump administration recently served subpoenas at the homes of Times journalists who had reported on a Qatari-donated jet—worth hundreds of millions of dollars—intended for use as Air Force One. The reporters' investigation found that on its inaugural trip to Turkey, the jet lacked sufficient security capability; the president initially denied the reporting but it was subsequently confirmed. The Justice Department's subpoenas targeted not only the journalists themselves but also sought phone and text records from their family members, a tactic Sulzberger called a "gross overreach." He told the affected reporters: "We have your back, and we'll do whatever we need to support you." Their response, he noted with approval, was determination to pursue the story further.

Sulzberger pushed back on characterizations that the industry has "largely capitulated" to the administration, citing the Associated Press and Wall Street Journal as examples of outlets holding their ground. He noted that when the White House conditioned continued access on outlets calling a body of water the "Gulf of America" instead of the "Gulf of Mexico," they sued rather than comply. Yet he acknowledged that some newsrooms are experiencing a chilling effect—colleagues in Washington report that reporters at other outlets are avoiding certain stories out of fear their editors will kill them, preferring instead to wait for the Times to report first. That dynamic, Sulzberger emphasized, is the definition of chilling.

On artificial intelligence, Sulzberger advocated caution. He cited news organizations that "incredibly foolishly" handed full responsibility for writing and publishing articles to AI, resulting in published mistakes and invented journalists. His philosophy is that humans must remain responsible for everything published; AI, he stressed, is a tool, not an autonomous entity. The Times invests heavily in journalism the financial case for which is often difficult to justify—reporters in over 150 countries last year, including more than 70 in Ukraine alone, and investigative projects that take months or years to produce a single story. Sulzberger frames this as essential to democratic function, invoking the Founding Fathers' conviction that a free people require a free press, and Jefferson's stated preference for a press without government over a government without press.

Sulzberger's comments reflect a publisher navigating simultaneous threats to journalism from government and technology. The Trump administration's subpoena strategy—serving reporters at their homes and pursuing their family members' communications—represents what Sulzberger characterizes as the most aggressive press intimidation from a White House in more than a century. He attributes this partly to a chilling effect spreading through newsrooms, where some reporters avoid pursuing stories out of fear their editors will kill them to avoid retaliation, waiting instead for the Times to report first. This dynamic reveals how institutional pressure filters down to individual editorial decisions across the industry.

On the AI front, Sulzberger's caution reflects hard lessons from newsrooms that rashly automated content creation. His insistence that humans remain responsible for all published material directly counters the notion that AI can operate independently—a principle he frames as non-negotiable. The lawsuits against OpenAI and Microsoft sit at the heart of this concern: AI companies built valuable models on journalism the Times and others created, yet those same models now threaten to disintermediate readers from the original reporting. Sulzberger's framing positions the legal fight not as corporate self-interest but as a defense of the economic foundation that allows journalism to function at scale (maintaining 150+ countries of reporting).