Email This to a Friend:

July 30, 2003

The Times’ new plan to restore its credibility, is to print articles critical of itself

Times to Name ‘Public Editor’ to Be Readers’ Representative

Seeking to mend the damage to the credibility and staff morale of The New York Times following a reporter’s extensive fabrications, the newspaper’s new executive editor today accepted the major recommendations of an internal committee, including the appointment of a “public editor” to serve as a representative for readers.

Acting on his first day as executive editor, Bill Keller wrote in a memorandum to the staff that he would soon hire a public editor, or ombudsman, who would “have license to write about issues of our coverage, and to have those independent, uncensored commentaries published in our pages.”

The easy critique of this is that the public editor may be unlikely to be highly critical of the people who sign his checks. But the point I want to make is that even if he or she slams the Times like crazy, it’s not the way to go.

Just as when Liberals go after Bush with disregard for the facts, now the Times is hiring an employee whose job it is to rip on the Times, regardless of the facts. What if the Times doesn’t need any attacking that week? What if they did everything right? That’s irrelevant – the editor’s job is to attack anyway. That’s what he’s being paid for, and he darn well better do it.

The erroneous journalistic and Liberal notion that they make a contribution by slamming whatever people do—is now being directed against the journalists and Liberals themselves.

The last thing I want to read is a lot of self-critical Times articles. The way to help is by helping, not attacking. Improve things and make everybody at the Times look good. That’s what I’d like to see.

Update: This is brilliant.