Employees at USA Today Co. learned their company had hired Palantir roughly 20 minutes before executives told investors about it. Four days later, more than 800 of them signed on to a demand that the deal be scrapped.
The joint statement, published Monday by 31 unionized newsrooms and reported by Nieman Lab, says CEO Mike Reed’s revenue rationale doesn’t cover the cost. “While USA Today Co. CEO Mike Reed championed this partnership as a way to drive revenue, we believe it threatens to undermine trust in our news outlets and raises serious questions about the data security of our readers,” it reads.
Employees wrote that the company’s AI software “has been used to advance widespread surveillance and power immigration crackdowns,” and that partnering with a major player in the news they cover creates “an inherent conflict of interest.” The statement also cites the Electronic Frontier Foundation’s reporting that Palantir’s work with ICE conflicts with its stated human rights policy, and points to co-founder Peter Thiel’s asseertion that freedom and democracy are incompatible.
USA Today Co. announced the deal on its second-quarter earnings call on August 6, framing it as a way to “strengthen how we collect, connect and activate audience data to drive more effective and faster monetization across our platform.”
“Part of the problem is that we know very, very little about how Palantir’s software is going to be used,” said Mike Davis, an Asbury Park Press reporter and vice-chair of the NewsGuild of New York. He called it surprising that management would bring in “such a controversial partner” without a full explanation to employees, “most of whom are naturally skeptical journalists.”
Reed told investors the company retains ownership of its audience data. Amy Garrard, vice president of labor relations, said in a Monday statement that the agreement is “a business decision focused on strengthening how we connect and better serve audiences, advertisers, and subscribers,” that data “remains protected under our existing privacy commitments, contractual safeguards, and applicable laws,” and that “our journalism remains fully independent.”
Davis raised a second worry the company statement doesn’t address: reporters’ own files.
“An investigative reporter who keeps a ton of sensitive notes, source information, and confidential documents on their devices is going to be naturally concerned about protecting that information,” he said. He said the distrust reflects a broader pattern of shifting priorities, following years of cuts to local news and a growing focus on AI.
For publishers, the dispute opens a new front. Choosing a technology vendor was once largely a procurement decision. Here, it has become an editorial issue because the vendor is also a subject of coverage, and because the chain’s more than 200 US papers and Newsquest’s more than 150 UK titles report directly on immigration enforcement and surveillance. Newsroom unions have spent the past two years bargaining over issues such as AI bylines and disclosure. Now they are applying similar pressure to the technology behind their newsrooms, as the industry faces a broader contraction that has eliminated more than 2,300 newsroom jobs this year.
The unions may not have the contractual power to kill the deal. But with 800 signatures behind them, they have put the burden on USA Today Co. to explain publicly what, exactly, Palantir will be allowed to touch.
