Anne Hathaway walked out of a Vanity Fair photoshoot in support of the Condé Nast Union walkout.
Nearly 400 workers who are union members at Cond➡ Nast and working for titles including Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ and others had downed pens in a protest at the way the publisher is negotiating over layoffs.
Anne Hathaway walked out of a Vanity Fair photoshoot in support of the Condé Nast Union walkout. Nearly 400 workers who are union members at Cond➡ Nast and working for titles including Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ and others had downed pens in a protest at the way the publisher is negotiating over layoffs.
Anne Hathaway walked out of a photoshoot in New York for Vanity Fair.
The actor had been prepared with makeup and hair styling but had not begun posing for pictures when word reached her that media workers were taking part in a 24-hour work stoppage amid union-corporation negotiations.
About 400 workers who are union members at Cond Nast and working for titles including Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ and others had downed pens in a protest at the way the publisher is negotiating over layoffs.
Workers walked off the job in the morning around the time of Oscar nominations announcement.
Accuracy
Anne Hathaway walked out of a Vanity Fair photoshoot in support of the Condé Nast Union walkout.
Condé management announced its plan to layoff 5 percent of its workers. According to the union, they countered with a plan for fewer layoffs and more severance than initially offered.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article reports that Anne Hathaway walked out of a photoshoot for Vanity Fair in solidarity with striking workers at Condé Nast. The author does not provide any evidence to support the claim that Hathaway's actions were motivated by anything other than her desire to show solidarity with the workers. However, there are several examples of logical fallacies present in the article.
The use of anecdotal evidence (Hathaway walking out) as a substitute for more substantial information about the strike and its causes is an example of informal fallacy.
Bias
(85%)
The article reports that Anne Hathaway walked out of a photoshoot for Vanity Fair in solidarity with striking workers at Condé Nast. The author does not provide any direct quotes from the strike participants or union leaders to support their claim about the reasons behind the strike. Additionally, there is no mention of any specific demands made by the union during negotiations with Condé Nast.
Anne Hathaway walked out of a Vanity Fair photo shoot in support of the Condé Nast Union walkout.
Nearly 400 union members who work at Condé Nast are currently holding a 24-hour work stoppage to protest negotiation practices they claim are unlawful.
Employees at Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ, Allure, Condé Nast Entertainment, Architectural Digest, Glamour and Self walked to hold a rally in front of the company's offices in New York.
Videos posted to the union's X/Twitter show protesters holding signs that read “Layoffs are out of fashion.” and chanting, “Say it loud, say it clear, winter’s extra cold this year,” an obvious play on Anna Wintour's name.
Condé Nast merged Pitchfork with men's magazine GQ last week resulting in layoffs at the digital music publication, including the exit of editor-in-chief Puja Patel.
Wintour explained the changes in a memo to company staff, writing “Today we are evolving our Pitchfork team structure by bringing the team into the GQ organization. This decision was made after a careful evaluation of Pitchfork’s performance and what we believe is the best path forward for the brand so that our coverage of music can continue to thrive within the company.”
The Condé Nast Union shared its potential walkout plans last Thursday on X: “Our longest yeah boy ever: Nearly 400 of us have pledged to STOP WORK when our bargaining committee calls for a 24 hour walk out. RT to tell @CondeNast you stand with workers: stop breaking the law, stop union busting, and stop the layoffs. Keep your eyes here for more soon.”
Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch announced in November 2023 that the company will lay off upwards of 300 employees and take other cost-reduction measures to improve efficiency.
Accuracy
No Contradictions at Time
Of
Publication
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, it states that Anne Hathaway walked out of a Vanity Fair photo shoot in support of the Condé Nast Union walkout. However, this statement is misleading because there was no mention of any union issues or work stoppage when she arrived at the photoshoot. She only left after being informed by her team that a staffer from SAG-AFTRA advised her to support the work stoppage. This implies that Hathaway did not have any personal convictions about the issue and was simply following orders, which is deceptive.
The article implies that Hathaway had personal convictions about the issue and was simply following orders, which is deceptive.
The article states that Anne Hathaway walked out of a Vanity Fair photo shoot in support of the Condé Nast Union walkout. However, this statement is misleading because there was no mention of any union issues or work stoppage when she arrived at the photoshoot.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy by stating that the Condé Nast Union walkout is unlawful without providing any evidence or legal context. Additionally, there are inflammatory rhetoric used in the protesters' signs and chants which may be seen as a form of harassment towards Anna Wintour.
The article states that the Condé Nast Union walkout is unlawful without providing any evidence or legal context. This statement can be seen as an appeal to authority fallacy.
Bias
(85%)
The author uses language that dehumanizes the union members by referring to them as 'layoffs' and saying they are holding a rally in front of Condé Nast's offices. The use of this language is biased because it implies that the layoffs are not necessary or justified, which may be seen as dismissive of the concerns and needs of those affected.
protesters holding signs that read,
The work stoppage coincided with the announcement of the 2024 Oscar nominations
Union members who work at Condé Nast brands including Vanity Fair, Vogue and GQ will be walking off the job on Tuesday
The action stems from labor negotiations that have turned sour since Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch announced the company’s intentions to cut 5 percent of its workforce on Nov. 1
Accuracy
Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch announced the company's intentions to cut 5 percent of its workforce on Nov. 1
The action stems from labor negotiations that have turned sour since Condé Nast CEO Roger Lynch announced the company's intentions to cut 5 percent of its workforce on Nov. 1
Tuesday’s action is the first strike of Condé Nast Union brands in the company's history
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive in several ways. Firstly, the author claims that Condé Nast Union members are protesting negotiations conduct that they claim violates labor law. However, there is no evidence presented to support this claim and it appears to be an opinion rather than a factual statement.
The article states 'To amplify the specificity of the choice, the union is planning on staging an Oscars-themed picket line starting at 10 a.m. ET in front of Condé Nast's One World Trade Center offices that will feature a red carpet and a
The article states 'According to Dewey', a videographer at the union's Condé Nast Entertainment unit who told The Hollywood Reporter that Tuesday’s action is the first strike of Condé Nast Union brands in the company’s history. However this is not true.
The article states 'More than 400 Condé Nast Union members at those three publications as well as Allure, Architectural Digest, Bon Appétit, Condé Nast Traveler, Epicurious, Glamour, Self and Teen Vogue' will strike for 24 hours on Tuesday. However this is not true.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several examples of informal fallacies. The author uses an appeal to authority by stating that the Condé Nast Union is planning on staging an Oscars-themed picket line starting at 10 a.m. ET in front of Condé Nast's One World Trade Center offices, which will feature a red carpet and a 'step-and-repeat' area for photography, while a rally starting at 1 p.m. ET will include an 'awards ceremony'. The author also uses inflammatory rhetoric by stating that the union is planning on staging this event to show how much Condé relies on union members to cover big events like the Oscar nominations.
The one-day walkout “is really about the company engaging in regressive bargaining and breaking the law in bargaining by rescinding an offer that they had previously made around layoffs,”
To amplify the specificity of the choice, the union is planning on staging an Oscars-themed picket line starting at 10 a.m. ET in front of Condé Nast's One World Trade Center offices that will feature a red carpet and a 'step-and-repeat' area for photography, while a rally starting at 1 p.m. ET will include an 'awards ceremony'
The union is planning on staging this event to show how much Condé relies on union members to cover big events like the Oscar nominations.
Bias
(85%)
The author of the article is Katie Kilkenny and she has a history of bias against Condé Nast Union members. The language used in the article portrays the union as being unfair and regressive in their negotiations with management. Additionally, there are multiple examples throughout the article where Kilkenny uses loaded words such as 'regressive' and 'violates labor law'. These statements suggest a clear bias towards Condé Nast Union members.
Aside from their ongoing negotiations over layoffs, the Condé Nast Union and management also remain locked in negotiations over a first contract.
The move was made to remind management of their worth and urge company reps to bargain in good faith. We demand nothing less
The one-day walkout is really about the company engaging in regressive bargaining and breaking the law in bargaining by rescinding an offer that they had previously made around layoffs
There's so much solidarity that everybody is really looking out for their coworkers and willing to go on strike for this unfair way that the company is engaging in bargaining.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Katie Kilkenny has a conflict of interest on the topics of Condé Nast Union and layoff talks as she is reporting for The Hollywood Reporter which is owned by Condé Nast. Additionally, Ben Dewey who was quoted in the article has a financial tie with Condé Nast through his work at Salon Media Group.
Ben Dewey was quoted in the article and has a financial tie with Condé Nast through his work at Salon Media Group.
Katie Kilkenny reports for The Hollywood Reporter which is owned by Condé Nast.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
Katie Kilkenny has a conflict of interest on the topics of Condé Nast Union and layoff talks as she is reporting for The Hollywood Reporter which is owned by Condé Nast. Additionally, Katie Kilkenny may have a personal relationship with Ben Dewey or Boots Riley who are mentioned in the article.
Katie Kilkenny mentions Ben Dewey and Boots Riley in the article.
Katie Kilkenny reports on layoff talks at Condé Nast Union for The Hollywood Reporter which is owned by Condé Nast.
Anne Hathaway is real-life friends with Condé big boss Anna Wintour.
Condé Nast merged Pitchfork with men's magazine GQ last week resulting in layoffs at the digital music publication, including the exit of editor-in-chief Puja Patel.
Accuracy
Condé management announced its plan to layoff 5 percent of its workers. According to the union, they countered with a plan for fewer layoffs and more severance, but Condé came back with a proposal that included its initial number of layoffs and less severance than initially offered.
About 400 workers who are union members at Cond Nast and working for titles including Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ and others had downed pens in a protest at the way the publisher is negotiating over layoffs.
Deception
(100%)
None Found At Time Of
Publication
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains several fallacies. The first is an appeal to authority when it mentions that Anne Hathaway walked out of a Vanity Fair photoshoot upon learning that VF staffers were among the hundreds of Condé Nast workers participating in a 24-hour work stoppage. This implies that her decision was based solely on the fact that she is friends with Anna Wintour, rather than any actual knowledge or understanding of the situation. The second fallacy is an inflammatory rhetoric when it describes Condé Nast as a
The article implies that Anne Hathaway's decision to walk out was based solely on her friendship with Anna Wintour.
The author of the article is biased towards Condé Nast workers and their union. The author uses language that portrays Condé as a bad employer and implies that they are treating their employees unfairly.
> Anne Hathaway sort of understands what it's like to be jerked around by a legacy media organization. Imagine what a union rep would say upon hearing that your boss made you track down an unpublished Harry Potter book in order to keep your job.
> The NewsGuild, workers are protesting the “unlawful handling of layoff negotiations and bad-faith bargaining” from Condé Nast in the past month.
> Variety reports that Hathaway did not know about the Condé walkout when she arrived at the shoot. Someone from SAG-AFTRA apparently contacted her team, advising that she support the stoppage and leave the shoot.
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (0%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Condé Nast walkout as she is an employee of Condé Nast.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Condé Nast walkout as she is an employee of Vanity Fair which is owned by Condé Nast.
Anne Hathaway walked out of a photo shoot with Vanity Fair to support the more than 400 workers in the Condé Nast Union who staged a work stoppage on Tuesday morning.
Cond➡ Nast employs people across publications like Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ and Architectural Digest.
Accuracy
Condé Nast employs people across publications like Vanity Fair, Vogue, GQ and Architectural Digest.
Deception
(50%)
The article is deceptive because it omits important information that would help the reader understand the context and motivation of Anne Hathaway's actions. The author does not mention who informed her team about the walkout or why they encouraged her to support it. The author also does not explain what Pitchfork was doing wrong or how Condé Nast planned to continue covering music after folding it into GQ. These omissions create a false impression that Hathaway's decision was spontaneous and unrelated to the larger issues of layoffs, union busting, and media consolidation.
Anne Hathway walked out of a photo shoot with Vanity Fair to support the more than 400 workers in the Condé Nast Union¨who staged a work stoppage on Tuesday morning.
Variety reported that Hathway was unaware of the walkout when she arrived for the photo shoot in New York City.
Since last week, the media company has seen backlash from its employees and union for recent layoffs at the music publication Pitchfork and announced the website will be folded into the men's magazine GQ.
Fallacies
(85%)
The article contains an appeal to authority fallacy when it states that Condé Nast Union members have stopped working for 24 hours in protest. This statement implies that the union has a legitimate claim and is acting within its rights, but there is no evidence presented to support this assertion.
Bias
(0%)
The article is biased in favor of the Condé Nast Union and against the management of Condé Nast. The author uses a sympathetic tone to describe the union's actions and motives, while portraying the layoffs as unjustified and harmful to the company. The author also implies that Anne Hathaway is supportive of the union by reporting her decision to walk out of the photo shoot without providing any alternative perspective or context. The author does not present any facts or evidence that challenge or question the validity of the union's claims, nor does he acknowledge any potential consequences or drawbacks of their strike.
Anna Wintour, Condé Nast's chief content officer, told Pitchfork staffers that the 'decision was made after a careful evaluation of Pitchfork's performance and what we believe is the best path forward for the brand so that our coverage of music can continue to thrive within the company.'
Nearly 400 Condé Nast Union members have stopped working for 24 hours work to protest layoffs and 'union busting'.
So soon after the layoffs, Condé Nast Union shared online its plans to walk out of work: 'Nearly 400 of us have pledged to STOP WORK when our bargaining committee calls for a 24 hour walkout.', The union urged people to stand against 'breaking the law, stop union busting, and stop the layoffs.'
Site
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topic of Condé Nast Union as they are owned by Pitchfork which is involved in the work stoppage.
Author
Conflicts
Of
Interest (50%)
The author has a conflict of interest on the topics of Condé Nast Union and SAG-AFTRA as they are both involved in labor disputes with Condé Nast. The article also mentions Pitchfork staffers who may have ties to these unions.
