Funny. Tech bros insisted that this wouldn’t happen.

This is the best summary I could come up with:

In a memo obtained by The Wrap, the New York Times Guild said that firing nine out of the newspaper’s 16 artists “reflect[s] a broader mindset that puts cost savings over people and the quality of our work.”

As the union maintains, shrinking the NYT art department by more than half represents one of the paper’s largest AI-driven staff reductions to date, during an industry-wide reckoning with the burgeoning technology.

As The Wrap points out, these job cuts come even as the newspaper sues OpenAI and Microsoft for using its copyrighted work without permission to train large language models (LLMs).

In a statement, a representative for the NYT claimed that art department staffers were offered voluntary buyouts and that the cuts were not driven by a desire to replace human workers with AI.

“Cutting nine human roles and expecting that work to be done by software is a troubling instance of our members being replaced by technology, at a moment when the company’s dabbling in AI threatens the security of other essential jobs.”

In statements about the NYT’s excellence in artistry, guild members pointed out that the newspaper recently won nine gold medals from the Society for News Design, suggesting that its industry standing hinges on its art.

The original article contains 381 words, the summary contains 205 words. Saved 46%. I’m a bot and I’m open source!

Imperial core gonna imperial core.

This is not really surprising. Everyone’s jobs are on notice at this point. Sure there are a few things that are pretty safe, but a large amount could be cut with just one more advancement.

What was their job at NYT? What do artists do there? Why do they need so many?