Business Insider employees concerned following parent company's request for internal review prompted by Bill Ackman's grievances
Axel Springer's financial-focused US outlet, Business Insider, faces rare public scrutiny as its reporting is questioned by its parent company, causing alarm among staffers
This article first appeared in the "Reliable Sources" newsletter. To receive daily updates on the changing media landscape, sign up for the digest here.
It is unusual for news organizations to have their reporting publicly questioned by their parent companies. However, German publishing giant Axel Springer has put its financial-focused US outlet, Business Insider, under rare and embarrassing scrutiny.
Business Insider faced criticism from billionaire Bill Ackman last week after publishing articles accusing his wife, former Massachusetts Institute of Technology professor Neri Oxman, of plagiarizing some of her work. This controversy arose after Ackman was involved in the campaign to remove Claudine Gay as Harvard University's president, initially targeting her for the school's handling of anti-Semitism, and later for plagiarism, resulting in her removal. Ackman defended his wife on social media, arguing she should be immune from criticism tied to his activism, despite Oxman acknowledging "errors" in her work.
Axel Springer stated on Sunday that instead of just enduring criticism, it will be requiring the digital publication to undergo a "review" of its work, recognizing that the reports' accuracy seemed to be valid.
"While the reports' accuracy has not been challenged, concerns have surfaced in recent days regarding the motives and approach behind the reportingquestions that we consider very important," a representative of Axel Springer explained in a statement. "Our media brands work independently, but all Axel Springer publications are dedicated to journalism that adheres to strict editorial standards and procedures."
Axel Springer, the German publishing company, firmly denied that the review of its newsroom had anything to do with Ackman reaching out to KKR, its largest shareholder. Despite the company not disclosing the specifics of the review, employees have expressed concern about the potential second-guessing of their reporting. Insider Union also released a statement expressing disappointment with Axel Springer's public questioning of its journalists' integrity.
Business Insider staff are worried about the potential impact of the review, especially in a newsroom known for its bold reporting on influential figures. According to one staff member, journalists are concerned about the "chilling effect" that Axel Springer's decision could have on the organization.
"There is a great deal of concern," said the staff member, who asked to remain anonymous due to not being authorized to speak to the press about the issue.
Another member of the staff expressed concerns about Axel's past reliability in avoiding reporting, and urged for a quick resolution to the issue. They pointed out that Axel's actions set a negative precedent for investigative reporting. Meanwhile, Nicholas Carlson, the global editor-in-chief of Business Insider, sent a memo to his staff, standing by the outlets reporting. Carlson affirmed his decision to publish the stories and emphasized that the process was sound, and the motivations were truth and accountability.
Carlson wrote that our colleagues at Axel Springer have requested a review of our publishing process to ensure it meets our standards. He stands proudly by our newsroom and welcomes the review with confidence that it will put colleagues, readers, and stakeholders at ease. According to Bill Grueskin, a renowned professor at the Columbia Journalism School, it is very unusual for a news organization to publicly announce a review like this.
Grueskin explained that it is not uncommon to announce a review of a story when its accuracy is challenged. However, Axel Springer appears to be both confirming the truth of the story and expressing concern about its propriety.
"Alternatively, it would be more logical to conduct the investigation privately and then disclose the results or findings if necessary," suggested Grueskin. He stated that he saw no problem with reporting on Oxman's plagiarism. "But announcing the review in advance seems to be merely a tactic to appease Bill Ackman, who has made it clear that he will not be satisfied until he receives an apology, which in Grueskin's opinion, he does not deserve based on the current evidence."
