What an unexpected outcome! Who would’ve thought.

I didn’t mean the title, the NYY is much more subtle. You can notice how they use quotes that frame him as an “extremist”. The article itself is a bit of a hit piece I think, they want to make him seem like an ideologue, someone who is pushing a political agenda instead of leading the union. I truly believe these pieces are carefully produced to erode support from key actors by questioning their credibility. In this case, this guy simply has a grudge against billionaires. In other words the article is saying: he’s not about fair pay, he’s about making them pay, which in my mind is completely different. But that’s just my opinion and I can be wrong.

Observe how the NYT starts carefully crafting a narrative…