Can We Stop Pretending That Ann Kim Is Cancelled?

By Joe Rosenthal
October 19, 2025

Last week, the Minnesota Star Tribune published, “‘After tonight, Young Joni will be gone. Can we stop trying to cancel Ann Kim?’”, by features columnist Laura Yuen.

I reported on Ann Kim‘s campaign of union busting at her now-defunct restaurant Kim‘s. Leading up to the unionization vote, Ann Kim hired a publicist who previously represented Spyhouse Coffee Roasters during their staff‘s failed unionization effort, and she sent her former staff a barrage of coercive anti-union messages. After the staff unionized, she ended Kim‘s popular bar service and then abruptly shuttered the restaurant before a contract could be negotiated with the union.

After I started reporting on Ann Kim‘s union-related activities, she was featured in promotional press from the New York Times across three different articles. “How America Became the Capital of Great Pizza” was published on June 25, 2024, and “‘22 of the Best Pizza Places in the United States’” was published the next day. In January, the Times published, “‘Where to Find Great New York Slices in 2025? You Might Be Surprised.’” The articles had no critical discussion of Ann Kim, and there was no mention of Kim‘s.

In March, Target partnered with Ann Kim for a line of frozen pizzas, dumplings, and meatballs. The next month, she collaborated with Indeed Brewing Co. Acclaimed Minneapolis chefs and restaurateurs have not skipped a beat in sharing Ann Kim‘s social media posts and taking photos with her. There‘s no evidence that Ann Kim‘s been cancelled.

The headline, “Young Joni is gone. Can we stop trying to cancel Ann Kim?” implied that Young Joni is closing because of an effort to “cancel” Ann Kim. But, as the article noted, Young Joni didn‘t close because of a consumer boycott: it closed because of a lease dispute with its landlord. Ann Kim is being sued for over $143,000.

In a civil complaint, the landlord claimed that “[o]n June 3, 2024, Young Joni declined to participate in arbitration stating it did not have the time and energy to go through such a process due to ongoing union issues at other restaurants Kim owned.” At that time, the union vote hadn‘t occurred, and the only “union issues” were Ann Kim‘s activities of hiring a publicist who previously represented a business with a failed unionization effort and sending union-busting messages to staff.

“‘Cancel’” is an inflammatory descriptor that serves to discredit those who’ve been critical of Ann Kim, and the piece as a whole dismisses harm toward workers. Restaurateur Kim Bartmann is notorious for her treatment of workers, but she was quoted in Yuen‘s piece in defense of Ann Kim. The only worker perspective in the article was from someone “‘disheartened’” by the union.

Under the heading, “‘a double standard for women,’” the article referenced local restaurateurs who suggested “‘misogyny’” and “‘low-key racism’” were to blame for “backlash” toward Ann Kim and referenced local restaurateurs who have escaped major criticism. If other restaurateurs have caused harm but saw no substantive consequences, the response shouldn’t be to dismiss critics of Ann Kim’s treatment of workers. We should call for accountability and interrogate why we haven’t seen it. That lack of accountability for others is the failure, not that people are upset about the plight of workers.

A restaurant union is not a magic pill. If staff have erratic working hours that at times result in an unlivable wage, as the Kim’s staff claimed, layoffs are necessary, and a union could have negotiated to see that action. Unionization is a desperate effort by the employees to take control of an uncontrollable situation. It’s an action to remedy inequity and ultimately stop the work environment from harming workers. It’s a failure of ownership if a situation becomes bad enough that workers feel like unionization is their only hope.

Ann Kim is not cancelled, but her failure to hold herself accountable is the biggest hurdle to shedding her reputation as a union buster. Should she acknowledge her harm and commit to do better, I would share that as loudly as any criticism I’ve leveled against her. But based on recent press, brand collaborations, and the embrace of local restaurateurs and chefs, that reputation doesn’t seem to be disqualifying.