The New York Times Claimed D.C.'s Minimum Wage Hike Created Jobs. We Exposed Their Error.
The reporting was cited by One Fair Wage as proof that its policy worked.

Did the number of restaurant workers in Washington, D.C., go up after the city voted to increase the minimum wage in a citywide referendum? That's what The New York Times reporter Priya Krishna claimed in an article that appeared in March, citing figures from the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS).
She reported that the total number of workers in the industry had increased from 13,690 in 2022 to 14,168 by September of 2023.
These numbers are false. It turns out that Krishna misunderstood the data she was looking at. The chart she linked to in the article presented numbers "in the thousands," meaning that the actual data were not 14,168 but 14,168,000, which also makes sense because Krishna didn't realize she was reading national BLS data—not local figures.
Reason contacted The Times about the mistake, and the paper issued a correction.
This would be just an embarrassing error, except that by the time the paper corrected the figures, the labor group that advocated for the minimum wage increase in D.C., One Fair Wage, had cited the Times' reporting as evidence that its policy hadn't negatively impacted employment in the district.
It has. When the law first went into effect in May 2023, full-service restaurant employment was at 29,678. Employment peaked in December of that year at 30,111 but since then has fallen by 4.1 percent to 28,875, as of October 2024.
The Times' correction of Krishna's initial mistake introduced new problems. The rewritten paragraph now claims that the number of workers in the industry increased to 77,356 in September 2023 from 71,762 a year earlier. And while, in this case, those are real numbers, they refer to employment from all leisure and hospitality establishments, including movie theaters, hotels, spas, golf courses, museums, and more. These job categories weren't impacted by the policy change that's the focus of the article. Using such a broad category doesn't tell us anything about the impact of the minimum wage increase on restaurants.
I pointed this out to Krishna and she replied, "We feel our language is accurate."
It's also curious that The Times selected data from September 2023 since the article was published in March 2024 and the BLS publishes employment data monthly.
BLS data that's specific to the restaurant industry, of course, exist. In February 2024—the latest data that Krishna likely would've had access to at the time—full-service restaurant employment had dropped to 28,632, a decrease of 3.52 percent, since May 2023. This data would have led to the conclusion that the minimum wage increase was having a negative impact on employment, which perhaps didn't fit with the preconceived story that Krishna wanted to tell.
One Fair Wage also shared a video of Krishna on its Instagram page two weeks after the article's publication with the caption "Listen in as @NYTimes talks about a bill we helped pass in Washington, D.C. that proves what we're doing is effective and gives a boost to service workers." In the video, Krishna references her article, claiming that the number of restaurants increased to 3,472 in 2024. However, that number also refers to all leisure and hospitality establishments, not just restaurants, and is from 2023, not 2024.
For more on the impact of increasing the minimum wage on restaurant jobs in D.C., watch my recent documentary on the topic: Why these workers want a LOWER minimum wage
Editor's Note: As of February 29, 2024, commenting privileges on reason.com posts are limited to Reason Plus subscribers. Past commenters are grandfathered in for a temporary period. Subscribe here to preserve your ability to comment. Your Reason Plus subscription also gives you an ad-free version of reason.com, along with full access to the digital edition and archives of Reason magazine. We request that comments be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment and ban commenters for any reason at any time. Comments may only be edited within 5 minutes of posting. Report abuses.
Please
to post comments
Good job for calling out NYT BS.
This is the kid of article that should be common on Reason, not the exception. Maybe hire this Zuckerman guy, and shitcan Boehm, Sullum, Binion, ENB, Bailey, Little Emma, Tuccille, and a few more.
And tell Good Liz to be Better Liz and stop citing the NYT and WaPo.
Agreed. Great article
Bolshevik apparatchik doing her job, publishing outright nonsense validating The Party. Might as well be a flat earther if you want to believe in minimum wage.
Math is racist.
Only sum of the time.
It's okay as long as planned parenthood keeps some races from multiplying
Now You're getting to the root of the problem.
hopes are high trust in NYT will fall like dominoes around here ...
Looks like things got a little hare for Krishna.
Lol
"We feel our language is accurate."
Liberals don't understand science. Science doesn't care how you feel.
Liberals understand THE Science.
Thomas Dolby understands that Science can be harmful to one’s vision:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=V83JR2IoI8k
^Exactly this
Because they make up definitions for words like some sort of evil Humpty Dumpty.
""Krishna references her article, claiming that the number of restaurants increased to 3,472 in 2024. However, that number also refers to all leisure and hospitality establishments, not just restaurants, and is from 2023, not 2024. ""
But it feels like it's from 2024.
The data self-identifies as current.
AC or DC? What voltage?
I'm THUNDERSTRUCK!!
This is a shocking revelation.
Not counting the number of restaurant chains that have disappeared lately or that chains are closing stores with poor performance in the market.
The retail apocalypse continues.
Online Word Puzzle company masquerading as a news organization.
"It turns out that Krishna misunderstood the data she was looking at."
Typical broad.
Good thing she only makes $0.70 on the dollar of what a man would make
It's WHY she only makes $0.70 on the dollar of what a man would make
"We feel our language is accurate."
"We feel you should lose your job."
Cool article. I just read it while sucking a cold drink through one of the 500,000,000 straws Americans use every day.
Fuck Big Turtle
The left has made a complete joke of the terms 'science' and 'studies'. They are so rich in BS propaganda that 90% of it relies on previous BS propaganda on-top of BS propaganda on-top of BS propaganda.
The most obvious ones being 2nd Hand Smoke and Climate Change.
You're a blazing idiot if you believe either one of those two "fairy-tales" of BS.
The Legacy media is falling apart and hopefully it will take the N.Y.Times with it into the crapper. Take the WaPo along with it too.
The editors and staff at both wastes of paper and ink live inside a bubble which explains the lack of any credulity.
The worst part of it is they have no shame...at all.
Well, the NYTimes reporter may have lied in this instance, but in regards to everything else they report, you can totally trust them. After all, they are the paper of record for all things supporting the left.
"Briefly stated, the Gell-Mann Amnesia effect is as follows. You open the newspaper to an article on some subject you know well. In Murray's case, physics. In mine, show business. You read the article and see the journalist has absolutely no understanding of either the facts or the issues. Often, the article is so wrong it actually presents the story backward—reversing cause and effect. I call these the "wet streets cause rain" stories. Paper's full of them.
In any case, you read with exasperation or amusement the multiple errors in a story, and then turn the page to national or international affairs, and read as if the rest of the newspaper was somehow more accurate about Palestine than the baloney you just read. You turn the page, and forget what you know."
– Michael Crichton (1942-2008)
Props to the author. Good article
"Artificial" increases in grocery prices demand government control.
"Artificially" depressed prices for labor demand government control.
Now I get it.
These woke yoing "journalists" are wildly incompetent and poorly educated.
They went through the indoctrination and brainwashing at journalism schools.
I still want to know, as I noted on the original article, if the author did the research on the original article herself or did she use information provided to her. And if it was provided by whom.
I strongly suspect it was given to her and since she believes her role is to advance left wing political initiatives she published it unchecked. That's why she continues to produce inaccurate descriptions, she's trying to remain as helpful to her allies as possible.
Unbiased, factual reporting is discouraged in college classes. Instead, it's about activism which means distorting and ignoring important facts.
Well, the New York Times is the newspaper of record, even if it is a false, manufactured, narrative record. Also, truth dies in darkness.