The discussions sparked at the Cannes Lions Festival will echo in professional circles for quite some time. One such conversation was initiated by Meredith Kopit Levien, CEO of The New York Times, as she defended the commercial value of serious journalism and outlined the company’s stance on artificial intelligence and its strategy toward digital platforms during a podcast recorded by Semafor.
Talking about AI, as AdWeek reports, Levien emphasized that The New York Times’ position is primarily legal and commercial in nature, focusing on intellectual property, not just data. The Times has filed lawsuits against OpenAI and Microsoft for using its content in AI models, but at the same time, in May, signed a licensing agreement with Amazon.
“You call it data – I call it intellectual property,” Levien said.
“We operate within an ecosystem shaped by big tech companies. The best outcome for all parties are commercial agreements that reflect a fair exchange of value and give The New York Times control over the use of its commercial property,” she explained.
She did not disclose financial details of the deal with Amazon but described it as sustainable, protective, and aligned with the presence of Times journalism “across a wide range of Amazon products.”
OpenAI Opposes Court Ruling Requiring Retention of Deleted ChatGPT Conversations
Levien also responded to criticism that The New York Times has been slow in digital innovation – especially compared to companies like BuzzFeed. Smith, former editor-in-chief of BuzzFeed News, admitted he once thought the Times was lagging behind in adaptation, to which Levien replied that the company’s pace has been deliberate.
“We are thoughtful. We know clearly what matters to us – truth, accountability, no favoritism,” she said, adding; “Everything else can change.”
She pointed to earlier decisions to invest in the web and mobile apps, direct distribution to users, and subscription growth as examples of a long-term strategy that is now proving to be forward-thinking.
“My job is to make decisions that will make sense 15 years from now,” Levien said.
This approach is also being applied to new platforms. Levien admitted that The Times was late to TikTok and cautious with video, but said the company is now thoughtfully expanding its YouTube presence, especially through its opinion vertical.
She added that reader engagement across all Times products, from investigative journalism to lists and games, is “undeniably good for business.” She emphasized that the subscription model depends on The Times becoming a daily habit, which means being present through various formats and touchpoints – not just through news.
Levien stressed that while the company aims to broaden its audience across multiple channels, the goal is not to reach the largest number of people, but to build habit and depth of relationship with readers.
“We’re not chasing audience – we’re meeting curious people wherever they are,” she said.
When Semafor editor-in-chief Ben Smith asked whether investigative journalism that confronts the powerful is bad for business – a view allegedly implied by some competing publishers – Levien firmly rejected the notion, saying that journalism is the foundation of the company’s success.
“The role of media is to hold the powerful accountable,” Levien stated.
“Sometimes that may seem like conflict, but that’s not the essence. The essence is holding power to account in a way that serves society,” she concluded.
