The New York Times Magazine "tip" column this week is headlined "How to Give Away Your Trust Fund."
"Don't ignore a feeling that you have more than you need," the column advises, describing a woman who "spent years feeling ashamed, when even her closest friends didn't know she had a trust fund."
It's something for a newspaper published by the sixth member of the Ochs-Sulzberger family to control the paper—a newspaper that itself is controlled by something called The 1997 Trust—to go around advising other families that, as the magazine article quotes someone saying, "we're all going to die from climate change anyway," so you might as well "redistribute" your money to "social-justice organizing led by people most impacted by oppression."
If the Ochs-Sulzberger family feels ashamed of its own trust, one wishes that it would work out the issues privately rather than inflicting them on newspaper readers. Otherwise they risk giving readers the impression that the family feels there's some kind of difference between themselves and the non-Sulzberger rich; trust funds are fine for descendants of Adolph Ochs, but everyone else ought to shut theirs down and give to money to social-justice organizing.
Though some might jest that, given the financial return on The 1997 Trust compared to other possible investments since it was created, and given at least some of the content of the Times, the Ochs-Sulzbergers may have been not quite as hypocritical on this front as it might seem.