Blue Crab Boulevard

Thought Control, American Style

A lecture on how not to run the New York Times comes today from Daniel Finkelstein, the op-ed editor for the Times of London. Not that the NYT will take any notice, but it a lesson on how to run an op-ed section that the NYT - and especially the NYT 'public editor' -would be smart to listen to. Finkelstein addresses his comments as an open letter to the readership of the New York Times:

Dear Friends,

I understand that your newspaper of choice has asked William Kristol, the conservative commentator, to provide an opinion column for the paper.

Since I am the op-ed editor of what you Americans call The Times of London, I have followed the controversy that the appointment has caused with great interest.

And with my mouth wide open.

Apparently many of you are outraged to hear of this new columnist. You have been writing in. And the Public Editor has written a column criticising the appointment.

Excuse me, but what on earth is going on?

A quality newspaper should have columns reflecting a wide variety of opinions, even those uncongenial to the majority of its readers. While the bulk of a paper's columnists may reflect the publication's character and view, there must always be space for an alternative opinion.

Thus, for instance, while my paper supported the decision to invade Iraq (which happened to be my view too), many of our columnists (in fact probably a majority) did not concur.

It would never occur to me when selecting an individual columnist to be concerned that some readers might not agree with some of his positions.

And considering that Kristol represents a large strand of American opinion (even if it is a smaller strand of NYT reader opinion) it is entirely unremarkable that his columns should be commissioned.

Finkelstein heaps even more scorn on public editor (or ombudsman) Clark Hoyt, especially for this charming gem of American journalism:

And as for Hoyt's statement that:

This is not a person I would have rewarded with a regular spot in front of arguably the most elite audience in the nation.

Isn't this the most pompous sentence you have ever read in your life?

Yeah, that one is pretty bad. It has it all, pompousness and smarmy sucking up to the rapidly declining readership of the NYT. The left popped numerous blood vessels when Kristol was announced by the NYT - which is amusing in the extreme. The same group that screeches that they are being suppressed on nationwide television are the first to actually try to shut down opinions they don't want to hear.

Blogosphere, Left Wing, Media | Gaius Thursday, 17 January , 2008

By NortonPete, Thursday, 17 January , 2008 @ 8:26 pm

The New York Times, home of Jason Blair, plagiarizer extraordinaire.

Hey NYT, your stock price today is 15.04 or a fall of 2.78% for today.
By Gaius, Thursday, 17 January , 2008 @ 8:31 pm

Gee, maybe I should learn how to short them…..
By NortonPete, Friday, 18 January , 2008 @ 6:24 am

NYT has a high short ratio with 9.5% of the float shorted. No one wants to be short over a weekend, they might sell the place.
NYT could gain on short covering on a Friday, but since NYT has a bad balance sheet and lots of debt with little cash, Monday it will be time to get up and make the donuts again. IMHO.
By skeneogden, Friday, 18 January , 2008 @ 9:56 am

The gnashing of teeth by the lefty elitists that read the Times reminds me of this quote by William F. Buckley, Jr.

“Liberals claim to want to give a hearing to other views, but then are shocked and offended to discover that there are other views.”

They are so smug and self assured about their ideology. Why should they be so unnerved by an opposing viewpoint? Maybe, just maybe, they can’t handle the intellectual challenge of entertaining ideas other than their own.
By Bleepless, Friday, 18 January , 2008 @ 1:17 pm

This shows, quite tidily, the difference between journalism and the NYT.
By martian, Friday, 18 January , 2008 @ 3:33 pm

And it shows, quite tidily, just how intolerant the “tolerant” left is!
By sam, Friday, 18 January , 2008 @ 5:09 pm

The bad thing about having William Kristol writing for the NYT is that it might somewhat slow the decline of the paper into total irrelevance.
By Al in St. Lou, Saturday, 19 January , 2008 @ 11:11 am

Gee, Sam, did you have to rain on the parade? Pinch seems to be an irresistible force, dragging the NYT into bankruptcy. I hope Kristol can’t slow that march.