General phone screening then a SQL interview. The SQL interview is very strange in that it is an artificial construction akin to an SAT/ACT test. You are given 20 minutes, the prompts are provided verbally, and asked to analyze and interpret in the moment. I'd be hard-pressed to find any data analyst who outputs work in such an artificial way and seems to be an exclusionary practice that favors people who thrive in SAT/ACT environments. I also need to add how practices like this continue to create perpetuate inequity among minorities and other disadvantaged groups. Those who come from underrepresented backgrounds constantly struggle with imposter syndrome as well as having to face the very real nature of proving their worth to majority groups. Layering in additional vectors that seem designed to further add stress/anxiety does not seek to further the goal of increasing inclusivity. Companies need to ask themselves what is the goal of this process? Who is it designed to get through the gates? Is there inherent conscious/unconscious bias involved in what we are doing? I believe NYT as an org is one that wants to increase diversity of backgrounds and socioeconomic status, but having been through this process they have work to do to come up with more equitable forms of screening. I hope they do better.

Easy and enjoyable process. I was able to learn a lot through. Feel like the process helped me better understand my path in the NYT/media context. It consisted of a recruiter screen, hiring manager conversation, SQL test, and executive stakeholder conversation.