Pros
We produce consistently high-quality journalism
Cons
We have disappointing decision makers. All signs point to the outlet not lasting longer than the few years of funding given from Pierre Omidyar. There is zero transparency between leadership and other staff. They hired a CEO who has never been a CEO. She fired several of our colleagues to hire her west coast friends and give them all mid-six figure salaries (for part time work) while the majority of the editorial team is underpaid, overworked, and has a hiring freeze. She also created a position to hire a friend of a donor, at the donor's request. The CEO takes extended (5-6 weeks) trips to New York on The Intercept's dime: first class plane tickets, luxury NYC hotels for weeks -- all while booking the rest of visiting staff at a rundown hotel in Times Square. During a Q&A session with leadership, we were told all questions were welcome and then the CEO refused to answer questions about the salary inequity within the organization, labeling them as "inappropriate," despite running a media outlet with a focus on transparency.