Posted on 04/10/2005 12:53:05 PM PDT by Pikamax
'NY Times' Unveils Expanded Opinion Section
By E&P Staff
Published: April 10, 2005 11:00 AM ET
NEW YORK As promised, The New York Times unveiled its expanded Sunday op-ed section, a move set in motion at least partly by the decision to move the lengthy Frank Rich contributions here from Arts & Leisure. But there are several added angles, as well.
For one thing, since the new two-page group of columns runs as a spread, not merely opposite the editorials, the name has been changed from op-ed to “opinion.”
The paper has also shuffled columnists with longtime Sunday favorites Maureen Dowd and Thomas L. Friedman exiting this space to other days. The regulars on Sunday, as announced today by Gail Collins, the editorial page editor, will be Rich, Nicholas Kristof, and David Brooks.
The paper printed a box with the new schedule, which places Dowd on Wednesdays and Saturdays, with Friedman on Wednesdays and Fridays. John Tierney, who replaces William Safire, will appear on Tuesdays and Saturdays.
The public editor’s column will also appear on the spread but, in what appears to be a change, Collins said the column will run whenever the ombud chooses to write one. Outgoing public editor Dan Okrent wrote pretty much on an every-other-week schedule but his newly named successor Barney Calame has said he might not want to provide one quite that often.
Collins observed that Times readers are notably set in their ways and many howl when changes get made. The last time columnists got shuffled in 2003, “it was fascinating,” she wrote, “how many people claimed to read the paper only on, say, Wednesday.”
She said that the Times has been doing a better job in promoting political diversity lately “than with a range of genders, ethnicities or even hometowns.” The entire stable of Times columnists resides in the Northeast corridor.
How can they expand the opinion section? Are they going to cut some ads?
More trees will die to bring out the Sunday Times.
And most reside in a liberal fog.
Yo, New York Times. Ain't enough lipstick in the world.
Tierney is a NYT reporter now given a column. Is he the heralded conservative replacement for Safire, or is Brooks the official safe Republican token voice?
Is that ANOTHER example of the "within one chromosone" remark???? :>)
Dowd on Wednesdays and Saturdays... the two least-read NYTs of the week. (Wednesday's bonus section is the totally unremarkable Dining In/Out. Saturday is, well, Saturday.)
It was no accident that the word 'stable' was used to describe the Slimes columnists ('cept for David Brooks), 'cause the place smells like plenty of horses*** to me.
Blues still writing for blues. SSDD.
Safire, reached at his office at the Dana Foundation, a non-profit group he now oversees in Washington, D.C., praised the choice of Tierney. "He's a fine reporter with a definite libertarian streak and a good sense of humor," Safire told E&P. "I'm rooting for him." Safire also said that another conservative voice on the page is positive. "I was hopeful that [Sulzberger] would get one or two columnists to reflect a different view from the editorial page, and I think he has done that." David Brooks, who joined the page in 2003, is its other conservative voice.
Tierney returned his predecessor's compliment. "I'm a huge fan of Bill's, and I would love to write a column as good as his, but I'm not replacing him," he said. "He is irreplaceable. I'm just writing on the same page."
Here's Tierney's most famous article:
It makes no sense to drive Tierney into the arms of the liberals by attacking him before he starts.
So they've taken a raving leftist moonbat and a leftist pretending to be a moderate off the Sunday page, and replaced them with - a raving leftist moonbat and a leftist pretending to be a moderate! But I see they've also generously thrown in a phony "conservative" as well, so I guess we're supposed to praise them for their "diversity."
why not just have 2 front pages?
I've read Tierney's work, in particular that article you link to, and I agree it's excellent. However, if anyone drives Tierney into the arms of the liberals, it won't be the posters on FR. It'll be the Upper West Side limousine liberals who will make a full time occupation out of trashing him and every word he writes. They just wear you down after a while.
I doubt he gives even five seconds thought in a day to FR and us Freepers, like the rest of the staff at the Slimes. To them, we're so far down the ladder that dog crap on the bottom of their shoes is more valuable. This isn't as much of a liberal thying as it is an elitism thing (though these two more often than not go together, but that's a wholy different discussion). I'm sure they dispatch some intern or co-op to monitor FR, under the guise of "you've got to know what those right-wing lunatics are saying," but in reality they consider it to be the worst form of scut, about on the same level as scrubbing out toilets.
Signed,
Puzzled in NJ
Rules are rules.
On FR any mention of the aging, bitter, and sagging Maureen Dowd is usually answered by a host of pics of Catherine Zeta-Jones.
One picture doesn't make a "host". So, where's the rest of the FR army?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.