"Judy’s departure has kind of freed people up"

[donsu]

http://www.lacitybeat.com/article.php?id=3001&IssueNum=132


(from interview with Frank Rich)

-snip-

-The press – and the Times in particular – have taken some rough hits recently, and I think that the Judith Miller thing may not be as obvious a scandal in some ways as Jayson Blair, but I think it is in some ways more important.-

There’s no question that this paper has had some really difficult times over the past several years. It began with the Jayson Blair/Howell Raines meltdown, and we have to remember that it was during that period, as well, though unbeknownst to many of us, that we ran a lot of this credulous and suspect reporting about WMDs, some of which, but not all of which, was by Judy Miller. After Howell Raines was fired, Bill Keller, who I have a very high opinion of, came in and had a lot of fires to put out. He was handed a pretty bum hand that he had to play. And what’s been going on ever since is a really serious attempt to rebuild the paper and its credibility, and what Judy Miller has done has reminded people of all the stuff that went down in the run-up to the war in The New York Times and in other papers.

The Times has written an editor’s note apologizing for it, the public editor has done more about it, and, while the paper can’t rewrite the past. I think that Judy’s departure has kind of freed people up. Almost instantaneously, with Judy’s departure, we’ve had a couple of really tough scoops, including things out of Washington and stuff involving the Valerie Plame case. I think the focus of everyone is to be an aggressive and fair paper … that it has to be, for our democracy. Because if a paper like the Times can’t write without fear or favor, we’re all in trouble.
----------------------------------

too late, we all are in trouble now.

notice the "almost instantaneously" freeing up when Judy left.

[brentspeak]

1. They're going to have to get rid of Sulzberger, Jr.

if the Times is to get back to its glory days of being a great paper. The Times started to go downhill the moment he was handed the publishers position.

[hippiechick]

2. "the focus .. is to be an aggressive and fair paper "

"Because if a paper like the Times can’t write without fear or favor, we’re all in trouble."



... too bad they didn't think of that back in 2000 and 2003 .... :eyes:

[tularetom]

3. Does he realize how bad this sounds?

He makes it sound like Miller had veto power over the paper's content. Not that I find that hard to believe but I am always amazed when they admit shit like this. I think Rich, Krugman and other NYT staff members with integrity ought to stage a coup and take over the editorial responsibility.

And when they get done, go to the WP where the situation may be even worse.