THE PUBLIC EDITOR - An Advocate for [NY]Times Readers Introduces Himself (cautious optimism alert)

New York Times ^ | December 7, 2003 | By DANIEL OKRENT

[68skylark]

Call me naive (or worse) but I think this could be good news. No one expects the Times to shift into the middle of the political spectrum any time soon, but maybe this guy can expose one or two of their more extreme left-wing biases. If so, I'd call that a good thing.

[afuturegovernor]

I would like to see the NYTimes move to the middle but I'm not holding my breath.

[Faraday]

Focus groups must have come back poorly. The NYT is a sinking ship. Its biases and fabrications have become common knowledge. This is a weak and predictable response. If they lose enough in subscriptions, advertising, and citations, they may reconsider their rabid leftism.

[aynrandfreak]

This guy used to be editor for Time/Life. Cautious optimism is too optimistic.

[Leroy S. Mort]

Okrent's main claim to fame is that he "invented" Rotisserie League Baseball. Now THAT should put the fear of God into the Times writers.

[William McKinley]

The fact that he thinks that halfway between the Times' editorial board and William Safire is the middle, and the fact that he thinks the equivalent to Bill O'Reilly is Michael Moore, augers poorly for this being any great shakes.

[Faraday]

I highly recommend: JOURNALISTIC FRAUD -- How The New York Times Distorts the News and Why It Can No Longer Be Trusted by Bob Kohn, WND Books, 2003.

[Rodney King]

OK, so he is a liberal on every single issue imaginable excpet perhaps every now and then he thinks the use of the military is ok. What is there to be optimistic about?

[Rodney King]

What's Rotisserie league baseball? Is that like the stirp-club softball league on Married with Children, only sponsored by rotisserie chicken places instead of strip clubs?

[John H K]

Rotisserie League Baseball was named after the restaurant where it was invented by a group of guys.

It's the origin of ALL Fantasy sports today.

It's drafting teams of players and your team is ranked by their stats they get during the year; you can "trade" players, drop them and pick them up off waivers.

Fantasy Baseball has now been outstripped by fantasy football, largely because fantasy football is very simple and requires limited research.

[Rodney King]

Oh OK, i know what fantasy baseball is, but I didn't know it was called rotisserie league originally. Thanks.

[kitkat]

BUMP

[HarleyD]

OK. You're naive. :O)

Consider the following..."...the effort at impartiality that can sometimes make you lean over so far backward that you lose your balance altogether — these are inescapably part of the journalism business."

These aren't inescapably part of journalism. They're part of the NY Times. Notice he didn't say the Times was bringing him on to restore credibility which is what they should have said.

Gay rights! Abortion! Higher taxes! This guy is far left but they would like to make it sound like he's a "mainstream" RAT. This is all a smoke screen to make you think the leopard has changed its spots.

[68skylark]

Well, free trade and free speech are generally associated more with Republicans these days than with Democrats.

Yeah, this guy is a Democrat -- no one expected the Times to pick a Republican. Still, I'm cautiously optimistic because this guy at least acknowledges that there are other points of view besides New York Times editorials. No one expcets the Times to become right wing (or even centrist), but if they'll simply acknowledge that conservative and libertarian principles exist once in awhile, that would be a step in the right direction.

[okie01]

...draw a line from The Times's editorials on the left side to William Safire's column over on the right: you could place me just about at the halfway point.

In other words, Dan Okrent is a "moderate leftist".

But he's a good writer, a good thinker and, purportedly, a good guy. Not just one of the inventers of fantasy baseball, but something of a baseball historian -- which earns him credit with me.

This has a chance to be an improvement. At least, now, when somebody spots a Jayson Blair-like whopper, there'll be somebody to talk to...

[jagrmeister]

These ombudsmen and "reader's representatives" often do more harm than good (I hate to be a wet blanket). I remember during the GOP's run for governor here in California, many complained to the San Diego Union Tribune that they were not covering Democrat candidate Cruz Bustamante's involvement in a racist group called MECHA. The reader's representative used her column to bash the readers saying that they wanted coverage of an item from Bustamante's past but didn't want coverage of Arnold's past. Wait a minute! Readers wanted consistency. Either stop digging up mud 30 years back on Arnold or be balanced and also report on Bustamante's earlier misbehavior. These reader representatives often undergo Stockholm Syndrome and offer mild appeasement rather than real reform.

[ConvictHitlery]

... he thinks the equivalent to Bill O'Reilly is Michael Moore

Putting Micheal Moore on the same level with O'Reilly is Okrent's virgin thrown into a volcano.

Sorry virgins!

[blanknoone]

Hey, Danny boy Okrent, I have my reader representative analyst of the Slimes. Her name is Ann. Have you read her work? I would very much like an answer to that question as well as whether he has read Kohn's book about the Slimes.

[Mo1]

Let me acknowledge a theological principle of my own: I believe The Times is a great newspaper, but a profoundly fallible one. Deadline pressure, the competition for scoops, the effort at impartiality that can sometimes make you lean over so far backward that you lose your balance altogether — these are inescapably part of the journalism business.

Excuses .. Excuses .. Excuses

Sounds like thing won't be changing at the Times, IMO

[VeniVidiVici]

Duhhhh, is this the fox watching the chicken coop or what?

I know the Orlando Sentinel makes a big todo once a year about appointing a new civilian board to critique its stories.

They must never do a very good job because it's still a left wing POS rag. Even moreso since they got a new editor a few years ago.

So I wonder how the Times plans on bringing integrity back by hiring a journalist to watch over it?