A Review: Monitoring Jack Nicas

Jack Nicas has long been committed to journalism: After graduating from Boston University in 2010, he began his reporting career at a weekly newspaper in Massachusetts before moving on to roles at The Lowell Sun, The Boston Globe, and the St. Petersburg Times. From 2011 to 2018, he reported for The Wall Street Journal before moving to San Francisco to cover technology for The New York Times. Despite his previous focus on beats like technology and aviation, Nicas was interested in becoming a foreign correspondent, particularly in Latin America. In 2021, when he got a phone call about an open job in Brazil, his aspiration materialized and he moved to Rio de Janeiro. There, the Spanish classes he had previously enrolled in were useless – he began to learn Portuguese and, following a two-month trial period, he was appointed Brazil bureau chief for The Times in December of that year. In mid-2025, he transitioned to his current role as The Times’ Mexico City bureau chief, overseeing coverage of Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean. After a critical analysis of twelve of Nicas’ recent articles, it’s apparent that his journalistic style is uniquely his, including certain patterns in his prose, his typical story topics, and potential biases in his reporting.

There’s an undeniable pattern in the subjects that Nicas focuses on most. In his work both as the Brazil and Mexico City bureau chief, it’s clear that he prioritizes politics, the economy, and the complicated relationship that the United States has with many Latin American countries. However, in the midst of his in-depth investigative and explanatory reporting, he manages to report on stories that pique human interest, or, as Nicas puts it, “unusual and surprising stories that you hopefully want to tell your friends at the bar.” The balance of such coverage makes for a strong journalistic repertoire that demonstrates Nicas’ understanding of complex global issues, but also of the people and events that contribute to the culture of Latin American countries. His stories are often in-depth and rarely superficial; Even when reporting on the vasectomies of capybaras in a gated community of Argentina in April – a seemingly sillier story – Nicas draws strong connections to the power dynamics that disparagingly prioritize the voices of the wealthy, as well as environmental concerns. His feature stories are fascinating, and range from profiling a former South American president who lived an overly modest lifestyle to exploring the virality of a troupe of beatboxing nuns. The juxtaposition of his thorough political pieces (he rarely writes purely hard news) against these vibrant stories of culture and humanity are what make Nicas’ content so strong. He has an ear for what’s important, but also remembers that the consumers of news are human beings who are also interested in human beings. Of the twelve stories analyzed, three were traditional features, and five others, though sharing current news stories, still leaned more thorough and essay-like. Four were traditional “hard news.” 

For the most part, Nicas’ reporting is unbiased, balancing the perspectives of opposing sides in all stories. In his Times profile, he notes that he reports with “empathy and an open mind,” and that he “treat(s) all subjects with the same honesty and respect, regardless of their backgrounds or worldviews.” This appears to be generally accurate, however, Nicas does have a tendency to frame issues a certain way (as is the case, intentional or not, for a majority of journalism). His word choice and occasional opinionated interjections do suggest his own perspective, mitigating the objectivity of his reporting. For one, he uses the verb “bully” in a story about Trump, which, albeit true, does hold a negative and opinionated connotation. Additionally, the way that his coverage shifted following his transition to leading Mexico City shows that he, naturally, had a stronger connection to both the country and reportage of Brazil. His coverage on Brazil was contextualized much stronger than his recent pieces, and his connection to the community was much more apparent. For the most part, though, Nicas maintains a commendable and crucial neutrality in journalism. 

Nicas’ writing abilities consistently bring his stories to the next level. He uses illustrative language to bolster the themes of his reporting, creating a world that readers can step into. His leads are particularly interesting in this way – rarely does Nicas begin his stories with a traditional time-and-place lead. Instead, he usually uses a character or an incident as a mechanism to tell an important story, told through a descriptive and vibrant scene. These stylistic choices are bold, especially when reporting on a traditional, news-y story, but they work – the true “lead” usually comes a bit farther down in the story. In his stories, Nicas uses verbs like “trumpeted” instead of “said,” and he doesn’t just tell readers what happened, but he sets a vivid scene. For instance, in a story about a Charlie Kirk protest in Lima, Peru, readers have no clue upon the first sentence that the story will venture into a political analysis of U.S-Peruvian relations (unless, of course, they read the headline). Instead, Nicas sets the scene, hopefully intriguing readers with strong, visceral writing: “They bounded off buses by the dozens — families from the poor peripheries of Lima, Peru, lured into the city with a free ride, free lunch and free ticket to a city water park.” These leads aren’t just a flex of his creative writing skills, but instead, work to potentially increase both readership and accessibility of complex foreign issues. His traditional leads are weaker and attempt to pack a bunch of information into a single sentence, a common journalistic feat that he hasn’t seemed to master. Not only does his writing contain strong descriptive elements, but Nicas also plays with paragraph lengths to emphasize certain points. He switches from longer paragraphs to short one-liners, the latter of which is usually a key idea or revelation. There’s an undeniable wit and charm woven into his work, rhythmically carrying his stories along. The hierarchy of his stories are usually chronological, or work backwards – he doesn’t subscribe to the traditional inverted pyramid style, which works well for him. 

A comparative analysis between Nicas and local Mexican reporter Guadalupe Galván revealed that Nicas’ strong writing skills aren’t the only thing that makes his work so successful – he maintains a thorough, analytical style of writing that rivals the work done by local journalists in the countries he covers. Galván, an editor for El Universal in Mexico, wrote a story about increasing US pressure towards the Mexican government’s retaliation on cartels. So did Nicas. In Galván’s story, headlined “US demands that Mexico be more aggressive against cartels,” she quotes, almost exclusively, from an official document about the matter. Where one would expect a slew of local insight, Galván tells the story instead from a primarily U.S.-based perspective, with Mexico on the receiving end of the Trump administration’s insistence. There seems to be no pushback or analysis of the Mexican government’s perspective, only a re-telling of what has been happening. This is not to say that Galván isn’t a talented reporter – the lack of nuance in her story is likely due to the pressure and danger that Mexican journalists face. Nicas, on the other hand, provides an analysis of the issue – he uses a specific example to convey the exacerbation of Trump’s pressures (“Under Pressure by Trump, Mexico Sends 26 Accused Cartel Operatives to U.S.”). He showcases Mexican president Sheinbaum’s pushback against the pressure, placing Mexico not in a pure state of victimization, but also of strength in the face of conflict. He provides context about the ongoing issue and poses questions against the U.S. government, whereas Galván seems to leave the issue as a summary of a document. However, while Nicas offers more analysis, Galván’s proximity to the issue still gives her reporting a unique immediacy and authority. It’s important to elevate the perspectives of the people actually experiencing the issue, which both do in their own ways. 

Nicas’ previous coverage of Brazil, Argentina, Chile, Paraguay and Uruguay, and current of Mexico, Central America, and the Caribbean, make for strong story assignments that, inevitably, have parallels. His profile from when he was Brazil bureau chief says that he reports on “any topic in that region, including politics, economics, culture, the environment and crime,” which ultimately proves true in his assignments there. However, his stories did seem to prioritize Brazil over the other regions he was assigned to focus on. In an announcement post on Instagram of his new role as Mexico City bureau chief, he highlighted the kinds of stories he hoped to tell: “I am arriving at an important and volatile moment, and I am eager to dive into stories on the shifting trends in immigration, organized crime, the economy, climate change and the complicated relationship between Mexico and the United States.” He has, most definitely, accomplished this. In both of his major roles at the Times, he has produced relevant content that accurately highlights important political and cultural events and people. The stories analyzed for this project include a story about the importance of an Oscar award in Brazil to the involvement of the U.S. in the cartel conflict in Mexico – clearly a diverse portfolio. 

A majority of Nicas’ political analysis in Latin America is directly tied back to the Trump administration (“Trump Escalates Fight With Brazil, Taking Aim at Its Economy and Politics”, “How to Become Trump’s ‘Favorite President’: Nonstop Praise.”, “Trump Escalates Fight With Brazil, Taking Aim at Its Economy and Politics.”). This tactic is interesting; His assignments utilize his strong knowledge of the United States and weave them into the stories he reports in Latin America. In a way, this is a nuanced take on global politics and foreign policy, but occasionally, it would be nice to see Nicas report about these countries in their own light, not as extensions of the U.S.. His analysis and prose are what elevate his assignments – his insight is strong, as are his explanatory abilities. However, as aforementioned, his understanding of Brazilian politics was obviously stronger than his of Mexico, leading to a much more in-depth reporting style during his time there. Of course, this is bound to change as Nicas settles into his role as Mexico City bureau chief. His ability to humanize otherwise larger-than-life political figures is strong in his assignments. However, sometimes he gets lost in the craft and has too much information – if such a thing is possible – leaving his assignments too thorough for their own good.

Nicas utilizes social media to interact with his audience and is consistently experimenting with new storytelling mediums. He maintains profiles on Instagram, LinkedIn, Threads, and X (though less-so), and self-promotes his stories while adding in some behind-the-scenes tidbits, too. He healthily shares independent content from his work-related travels, which humanizes him as a reporter. He has a banter with his audience that, as mentioned above, wittily transcends into his work as a reporter. While he doesn’t overtly use his social media as a route for sources, he asks users to DM or email him for his contacts on Signal and Whatsapp. His social media presence only emphasizes what was clear through his reportage – his clear connection with the cultures he reports on. He highlights important places he travels to, and just recently, launched a goodbye story to Brazil in the Times called “What’s in Our Queue? Mil Coisas Invisíveis and More,” where he shares his favorite cultural media of the country he’s spent years reporting from (here he hails director Kleber Mendonça Filho and singer Tim Maia, among others). Six years ago, Nicas administered a conversation on Reddit, under the NYT account, where he encouraged users to ask him anything. They did, and he answered honestly and thoroughly. He writes newsletters, has worked on an Emmy-winning documentary, and reports through video and other multimedia news package formats. He is clearly dedicated to maintaining a connection to his audience through social media and diversifying his reporting medium. 

Nicas’ reporting is a strong example of how a foreign correspondent should work. Along with his unique journalistic quirks, he maintains the ideology of a traditional journalist dedicated to preserving the truth, and sparking important crosscultural conversations.