THE NEW York Times double-crossed writer

www.nypost.com ^ | May 24, 2003 | Richard Johnson

[ThreePuttinDude]

TIMES BOSSES SHOW MEAN STYLE

May 24, 2003 -- THE NEW York Times double-crossed Styles section writer Alex Kuczynski this week by leaking word that the sexy journalist had quietly resigned - without noting her departure was merely temporary.

"Alex told the Times a year ago when she signed her book deal with Doubleday that she would take a six-month book leave," a source explains.

"They were fine at first, but when the time came for Alex to leave, the top brass said, 'times are rough - we want you to informally resign. No one will ever know.' "

Sadly, Times management went back on its word. On Monday, a "staff notes" memo was sent around to employees stating that, "Alex Kuczynski has resigned from the Times."

"Alex was furious," said our mole. "It was very upsetting."

Speculation was raised further when Kuczynski cleaned out her desk Tuesday afternoon, to make way for ex-New York scribe, Vanessa Grigoriadis, who will be joining the Styles section.

"Vanessa will sit at Alex's desk until she comes back - and she is coming back," our source said.

But others still aren't so sure Kuczynski will return. "The memo was the Times' way of pushing Alex out," one insider said. "They were supposed to send her a formal letter offering her job back, and they haven't. They are trying to screw her . . . she left for book leave in April and the memo didn't come out until now."

Kuczynski declined coment. A rep for the Times said at first: "Ms. Kuczynski left the Times in early April to write a book with the understanding that she would return to the Times later this year."

After Kuczynski threatened the Times with a lawsuit if they didn't sound "more enthusiatic" about getting her back, a Times rep added: "We anxiously await her return."

The dark days aren't over at the paper. Four unidentified reporters under investigation for Jayson Blair-like abuses "have banded together and threatened to sue the paper if their names are leaked," another mole added.

The probe has widened to include graft. "They are worried about people breaking the strict code at the paper about accepting gifts," our spy said. "The masses of reporters are getting angrier by the moment because they were held to strict standards while several others obviously were not."

[Grampa Dave]

Krugman took $50,000 from Enron for doing nothing.

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/610707/posts

KRUGMAN AND ENRON (he took money from them... and did nothing in return)
AndrewSullivan.com ^ | 1/18/02 | Andrew Sullivan


Posted on 01/17/2002 10:28 PM PST by xm177e2


KRUGMAN AND ENRON: We’re all used to Paul Krugman’s insistent attacks on the Bush administration’s economic policies, his suspicion of big business, his love of high taxes and greater government spending, and his withering scorn for idle corporate bloat and what he recently called the “crony capitalism,” epitomized by Enron. So I was a little taken aback by the nugget buried in yesterday’s Times that Krugman too has been on Enron’s payroll. Even more intriguing is what he was paid for. At the very end of the article we hear Krugman’s explanation for taking $50,000 as a consultant for Enron in 1999: "This was an advisory panel that had no function that I was aware of. My later interpretation is that it was all part of the way they built an image. All in all, I was just another brick in the wall." Run that by me again. He took $50,000 to sit on a panel that “had no function that I was aware of” except to add allure to Enron’s image? And today, he is still waxing self-righteous in his column about a corrupt system of regulation that allowed Enron to get away with financial murder. He’s right about the corruption and the need for stronger regulation. But don’t you think that someone who bemoans cronyism and corruption might, after this scandal broke, acknowledge in his own column that he himself was an Enron crony and that he contributed to

http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/610707/posts

[Sonny M]

OK...who got paid off and by whom?

Just to be clear, I am not defending the times, Krugman was one of the people who took cash, but, pretty much in every newspaper, people get paid off, one way or another, the Wall Street Journal had somone who was involved in some very shady business years ago, there have been rumors about the Times Business people, and every gossip columnist in every new york news papers is getting something from somone to say or print something and also it helps them "develop sources". Blair, wants to do a tell all book, I have a feeling he might rip apart the business section, and thats the lifeblood of the times not there political section.