What a year it’s been for New York Times reporter Joshua Tucker

A year ago, the Times’s Josh Tucker was the hottest story in journalism: The paper’s bestselling investigative reporter and a Pulitzer Prize finalist for his work exposing the fraud of the mortgage giants Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac.

Today, Tucker’s career is a cautionary tale for the Times.

Tucker, who has since left the Times, says the news organization has lost its credibility and is in danger of falling further behind the rest of the industry.

He is also a strong advocate for stricter regulation of Wall Street, especially as the country struggles with the financial crisis.

For Tucker, the stakes of the story are high: the risk that a reporter could be fired and his ability to do his job is at stake.

“This is a pretty big story, and it’s really important to know that,” Tucker said in an interview.

“I think the Times is in real trouble, and I think the rest [of the news organizations] are in trouble, too.”

The Times has long been known for its investigative reporting and aggressive reporting on government corruption and malfeasance.

But Tucker says the Times has been under a lot of pressure to change its culture since the financial collapse.

Tucker says he has had to work hard to get the Times to take action on issues like its hiring policy, its diversity hiring policies, and its handling of sexual harassment allegations.

In the aftermath of the Harvey Weinstein sexual harassment scandal, the newspaper changed its hiring policies and the way it covers the issues of sexual assault and harassment, which he says has been a significant factor in his departure.

Tucker also said the Times needs to change how it covers immigration, immigration reform, and climate change, which the paper has been slow to take seriously.

He believes the Times should be more aggressive in its coverage of the Trump administration, specifically its threats to withhold funding from NPR.

Tucker has also been a vocal critic of the Times’ reporting on the opioid epidemic and said it should have more aggressively pushed the issue in the wake of the opioid crisis.

“The Trump administration has been incredibly aggressive in their response to the opioid situation, but we are not seeing the same type of aggressive coverage that we have seen in other areas,” Tucker told New York magazine.

Tucker’s exit has led to speculation that the Times could go public, although it has not yet taken a formal position.

But even before the departure of Tucker, there were signs that the paper was struggling to adapt to a new environment in which stories about government corruption are less likely to be covered by the paper.

Tucker said he has been told by Times management that the organization will be looking at ways to shift its reporting on its finances to a more business-friendly perspective.

In its annual report, the paper said that it will be more transparent in its reporting, but declined to elaborate.

“We believe we can best serve our readers by continuing to focus on our core journalism and delivering timely, compelling, and timely news,” the report said.

The Times said in its report that the shift is in part a result of its changing relationship with a network that owns the newspaper.

Tucker had hoped to move to a news site owned by CNN, but it turned out to be too expensive, he said.

He said that the changes he’s been discussing with management could also help the paper better prepare for its eventual transition to a non-profit.

“If the paper does want to get in front of that transition, that’s where I would want to be,” Tucker explained.

“Because the future is going to be more uncertain than it is right now, and they need to start thinking about what that means for journalism and what the future holds for the paper.”