Comments on: NYT set to torpedo public editor

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » NYT editorial: Pull out now

Hot Air » Blog Archive » NYT editorial: Pull out now — Sun, 08 Jul 2007 04:36:26 +0000

[...] Since we’re Times-bashing, it’s worth mentioning the new column by their stooge ombudsman, Clark Hoyt. You may remember the rumors that Bill Keller was going to liquidate the ombudsman position after Barney Calame’s tenure expired, so allegedly unhappy was he with Calame’s criticism. He seems to have found a better solution: keep the position and fill it with a guy who’ll defend the Times three times out of four and on that rare fourth occasion will come at them from the place they don’t particularly mind being attacked from, i.e., the left. Hence tonight’s piece, which scolds the Times for its coverage of Al Qaeda: not the dearth of coverage of atrocities like the ones Yon’s been writing about this week but the excess of coverage in labeling enemy fighters “Al Qaeda” instead of “Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia” or “Sunni insurgents” or “BushCo’s pretext” or whatever. Let him explain why: There is plenty of evidence that Al Qaeda in Mesopotamia is but one of the challenges facing the United States military and that overemphasizing it distorts the true picture of what is happening there. While a president running out of time and policy options may want to talk about a single enemy that Americans hate and fear in the hope of uniting the country behind him, journalists have the obligation to ask tough questions about the accuracy of his statements… [...]

By: Hot Air » Blog Archive » NYT ombudsman: Front page story about “women living without spouses” was crap

Sun, 11 Feb 2007 02:50:52 +0000

[...] Last month I wondered whether the rumors of his termination and the alleged bad blood between him and Keller would lead Calame to hammer the Times in the few months he has left. He’d have nothing to lose and everything to gain by turning up the heat; with a string of strong pieces, the public editor position could come to be seen as so indispensable that Keller couldn’t eliminate it without taking flak. [...]

By: honora

honora — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 18:01:01 +0000

Does anyone know if this is the same guy who appears in “Wordplay?”

By: Kralizec

Kralizec — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 08:52:07 +0000

But the more media moves away from print and towards the web, the more the Times will end up sharing (virtual) space with its critics, whether it wants to or not. If they cancel Calame, all they’re doing is buying time

.
They’ll also give their critics on the web a fresh occasion for critique.

By: MayBee

MayBee — Thu, 04 Jan 2007 01:18:37 +0000

Bill Keller, Imperial Editor.

By: Entelechy

Entelechy — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 23:30:20 +0000

Slublog, whom did they have in mind? Keith Olbermann or Chris Matthews?

The NYT is really very, very sensitive…kind of a liberal trait…

By: Bill's Bites

Bill's Bites — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 19:02:43 +0000

al-NYT set to torpedo public editor…

No more NYTimes’ ombudsman?MIchelle Malkin I’ve had my criticisms of NYTimes ombudsman Byron Calame, but his mission is a difficult one–and he has earned my respect with two columns taking the paper to task for its flawed abortion in El…

By: Slublog

Slublog — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 17:10:17 +0000

The New York Times, March 29, 2006:

For months now, people have been urging President Bush to shake up his inner circle and bring in fresh air. Perhaps in response, the White House chief of staff, Andrew Card Jr., resigned yesterday. Mr. Bush opened the window — and in climbed his budget director, Joshua Bolten, who used to be Mr. Card’s deputy.

If this is what passes for a shake-up in this administration, the next two and a half years are going to be grim indeed. This is a meaningless change, and it simply sends the message that Mr. Bush lacks the gumption to trade in anyone in the comforting, friendly cast of characters who have kept him cocooned since his first inauguration.

Perhaps the editorial staff would like to turn their poison pen on their own boss?

By: Phil Byler

Phil Byler — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:42:23 +0000

The NY Times will be engaging in self-destructive bahavior if Keller fires the “Public Editor.” People can cite to that firing as evidence that the NY Times reporting cannot withstand scrutiny from even so normally passive a reviewing editor as Byron Calame. So I hope that Keller does fire the “Public Editor.” The NY Times has degenerated into a menace.

By: One Angry Christian

One Angry Christian — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:32:57 +0000

If they cancel Calame, all they’re doing is buying time.

I disagree with you here. I think they’re dumping gas on themselves. Any serious reader can see that they’re misreporting that story, and killing the guy who from within their own ranks grumbled about it.

That just adds yet more fuel to the fire that’s burning their readership down. I expect it will only make their free fall faster.

By: Anwyn

Anwyn — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:31:05 +0000

If they cancel Calame, all they’re doing is buying time.

And more baldly and more desperately showing their true colors. For those paying attention.

By: JammieWearingFool

JammieWearingFool — Wed, 03 Jan 2007 16:28:53 +0000

Rearranging the deck chairs on the journalistic Titanic. Or just getting rid of them altogether.