Thinking About His Next Job?
If your nose was turned on, you knew that Editor Deanie Baquets playful boys and girls were about to punch their sheep-like readers in the dentures. Reporter Timmy Reiterman, who does not draw many assignments these days, wrote an Only-an-Idiot-Would-Vote-for-This kind of story. I presume it is intended to look impressive among his clips. It is a 44-inch whopper. He could be a gangbanger with that kind of drive-by bullseyes. His premise was, gasp, that an organized national group was helping to bankroll voices favoring passage of Prop.90. What a novel notion. That hasnt happened elsewhere, except for other propositions on the Nov. 7 ballot. But when you are the only daily in town, you can play bully all day without fear of impugnity. Buried in the bowels of Mr. Reitermans story, mentioned more fleetingly than a man acknowledges the beauty of his ex-wife, is a deliciously salient fact that, as a sloppy reporter, he tripped over. In spite of his screed about out-of-state money for one of the most important national election issues, the gentleman confessed that the anti-90 people have raised $5.7 million against only $3.7 million for the pro-90 people. No need to investigate the pro-90 people, Timmy suggests, because we at the Times agree with them. Oh, I see.
Desperate Housewives and Hubby Journalists
The only clout the Times has to fear this month comes from Chicago where the newspapers parent company is working diligently on downsizing Americas worst big-city daily. Times staffers are desperately and understandably trying to save their jobs while the newspapers owner reaches for his lifetime supply of shrink-wrap. Fair enough. But wasnt it laughable last Sunday when the Times, oddly, brought back a dull, predictable, fired editor to rail validly, I say against excessive interference by the owner, Tribune Co.? The Times feels and looks like a messy place to work, its obsession with political ideology aside. The newspaper has become even more chaotic, more puerile, more like a broadsheet version of The Nation magazine, under Mr. Baquet than it was under the cashiered John Carroll.
Sacredness of Pledge to Readers
There is, of course, no ethical reason that would forbid a newspaper from standing stoutly for or against Prop. 90 or any other issue on the ballot. But, when a newspaper consistently presents, and advocates, a single view, it has breached a fundamental responsibility with its readers. It no longer may validly regard itself as a newspaper of general interest. When stunts like this mornings 90 tripleheader are pulled, the Times plunges the knife of credibility into its devious heart.
May I Introduce You to Integrity?
Integrity lies at the heart of every publications sustainability a shlubby term that liberals love to drop even if they are hazy about the definition. While I publicize my opinions, thefrontpageonline.com happily, aggressively publishes rival views, presenting them with matching prominence. This is an ethical cornerstone. Just as some people skip attendance at church when they go on holiday, the Times, under Mr. Baquet, has gone on a permanent ethical vacation. The most pimply-cheeked small-town journalist knows that you are deceiving your readers, your main asset, when you fail to offer them an honest, square accounting of a disputed subject. If you stack the newspaper with two attack pieces that your moral authority allows you to pass off as news stories, underpinned by an editorial intended to confirm the sagacity of your news judgment, baby, you have sold your blackened soul.
