Inside The Atlantic, Nicholas Thompson’s comments on Vox’s Channels podcast hit hard. He said his personal AI show was bringing in real money. That set off alarms in the newsroom. Staff saw more than a brag about profits. They saw the business side crossing into editorial territory.
In 2024, The Atlantic’s editorial union publicly questioned the company’s AI content licensing deal, with the tech editor describing such agreements as a 'devil’s bargain.'
For many staff, this isn’t just about appearances. Four people familiar with the situation describe a widening split between Thompson and editor-in-chief Jeffrey Goldberg. Goldberg reports to the board, not to Thompson. He’s clashed with the CEO’s approach. Thompson’s background as a former tech journalist and Wired editor-in-chief adds to the tension. His business projects carry a whiff of editorial credibility.
Staff complaints grew louder after Thompson booked OpenAI’s Sam Altman for an interview. Some felt that move undercut the newsroom’s own reporting. The show’s success has also revived debate over The Atlantic’s ties to AI companies. In 2024, Thompson made a content-licensing deal with OpenAI. Editorial staff pushed back. They accused AI labs of using journalists’ work as training data. The Atlantic’s editorial union questioned the deal. The tech editor wrote an op-ed calling such agreements a “devil’s bargain.”
Blurring the lines
The Atlantic’s 2024 content-licensing agreement with OpenAI was part of a broader trend, with other publishers like Associated Press, Financial Times, and News Corp. also signing deals. Industry estimates suggest OpenAI offered news organizations between $1 million and $5 million per year, though the exact figure for The Atlantic remains unconfirmed.
The Atlantic’s case stands out. Its legacy and the personalities involved make the stakes higher. The company’s events business and digital journalism have made it a rare media success story. Competitors like The Washington Post have struggled. But the fight over Thompson’s podcast and the OpenAI deal shows the risk of chasing new revenue without clear lines.
A senior source at The Atlantic says all business-side content, including The Most Interesting Thing in AI, carries clear disclaimers. Staff disagree. They argue listeners can easily miss these signals, especially when the host is both a former journalist and the CEO. The result? A show that feels editorial but is driven by business goals.
AI optimism meets newsroom skepticism
This isn’t just a process fight. It’s about substance. The Atlantic’s newsroom has published tough coverage of AI companies and their impact. Thompson’s public tone is much more upbeat. Staff worry the CEO’s stance and business deals could weaken the magazine’s critical reporting on AI. They point out that OpenAI has reportedly used The Atlantic’s stories for training and aggregation.
In August 2024, staff sent a letter highlighting cases where OpenAI was hallucinating Atlantic stories and linking to aggregated versions of its reporting. The union’s doubts about the OpenAI deal haven’t gone away. The editorial team keeps pushing for more transparency and control over how their journalism is used in AI systems.
As editorial and business lines blur, the risk grows inside the newsroom. Trust is on the line. Sam Altman agreed to appear on a sponsored podcast hosted by the CEO. He did not sit down with the magazine’s tech journalists. That says a lot. Power is shifting in media access and influence.
Brand, power, and the future of media
The Atlantic’s internal fight mirrors the bigger pressures on top publishers. Marketers have more ways to spend ad money. Independent journalists are building direct advertiser ties. Legacy outlets must rethink their business models. The old boundaries between editorial and commercial content existed for a reason. They protected journalism’s credibility and kept conflicts of interest out of reporting.
Still, as recent coverage shows, The Atlantic has grown its paying subscriber base even as Google referrals drop. Both Goldberg and Thompson have reasons to celebrate. But the magazine’s success has raised the stakes in the fight over brand direction and editorial independence.
Audiences notice these changes. Peter Kafka put it to Thompson: if you run or own a news outlet, you can shape its output. That doesn’t make it less unsettling for those who care about editorial autonomy. The Atlantic’s leaders now face a choice. Double down on business-driven innovation, or reinforce the editorial safeguards that have defined the brand for 168 years. The outcome will set the tone for media credibility in the AI era.
