Gail Collins, the former Times editorial page editor and current op-ed columnist, has come to the defense of colleague Maureen Dowd over attacks, including from the paper’s own public editor Clark Hoyt, that the flame-haired pundit is brewing with sexism. And it is awesomely, and unintentionally, backhanded.

CONTINUED »

Simon Dumenco on the need, or lack thereof, of newspaper ombudsmen sounds like the steps of mourning: “I found myself agreeing. [... ] Then, I confess, I found myself reverting to my usual position [...] vague indifference. [...] Then I found myself feeling a little guilty for not particularly caring.”

Do cash-strapped news rags need to be paying these fellas to complain about their coverage when everyone else, including this website, will do it for free?

CONTINUED »

The New York Times has been harsher on Barack Obama than Hillary Clinton, at least when it comes to A1 stories, and only after you factor in “what was happening in the news,” concludes public editor Clark Hoyt. And photo coverage has been nearly equal. So good job, Times, on bucking the trend. [NYT]

Clark Hoyt found his story for next week.

Today, the New York Times ran a lengthy article on John McCain that has already inspired late night talk show debate and merits a column from the public editor.

Part of its “Long Run” series, the Times questions McCain’s history of pretending to be above the Washington lobbying scene.

The piece has a lot of legitimate reporting on McCain’s hypocritical relationship with corporations. But this reporting will probably get lost in the rumors that McCain had an inappropriate relationship with a lady lobbyist.

But this obfuscation is the Times’s own fault. They lead with the smut:

CONTINUED »

The story of Public Editors at The New York Times has been a little like Goldie Locks and the Three Bears. The first one, Daniel Okrent, had too much fun with the column. His succeesor, Byron Calame had too little. The current Public Editor, Clark Hoyt, is just right.

This week he writes about the “scandal” du jour: The New York Times giving Bill Kristol a one-year contract to be an op-ed columnist. In the two weeks in between the Times announcement and Kristol’s actual first column, blogger mayhem ensued, with everyone being outraged for no real reason.

CONTINUED »

New York Times public editor Clark Hoyt got out his Champ HP3 Blender and stirred some shit up on Sunday when he called out T magazine for blurring the line between editorial and advertising in a way that would get other section editors fired. Oh, and he called them out on running a photo spread where 17-year-old model Ali Michael bares her left breast, in the way that Lindsay Lohan casually does when she runs out of two-sided tape.

“One sequence shows her ‘wearing’ a $3,890 blue taffeta coat by John Galliano,” writes Hoyt. “I say ‘wearing’ because the coat is bunched around her waist so that you can’t really tell what it is. She has her back to the camera and nothing else on. In one image, she is turned slightly, showing the outline of a bare breast, out of focus.”

Was it child pornography? Or high fashion-slash-art? The shoot cost tens of thousands of dollars to produce, so maybe … either? BOTH? Today, Keith Kelly makes sure the week doesn’t pass without an update on the internal Times feud that’s caught the world, or Eighth Avenue, by storm!

CONTINUED »

“While ombudsmen do not describe their newsroom relationships as particularly chummy, most say that reporters understand the public editor’s role and are good sports about being critiqued. ‘It’s a professional relationship,’ the Washington Post’s Deborah Howell says. ‘They don’t have to like me, as long as they respect me.’”

Because, as Howell puts it, “You don’t have any friends on this job.” And we completely agree! The relationship between ombudsman and his/her fellow staffers is so inherently awkward that, fundamentally, it’s all about mutual respect.

Or, in the case of New York Times‘ public editor Clark Hoyt, begrudging acceptance.

Mike Huckabee is currently fifth in the race for Republican nomination for President. His candidacy is so irrelevant that in a piece about the Times overlooking less popular candidates, Public Editor Clark Hoyt overlooked him.

If anyone can save the day, it’s Chuck Norris. The Sidekicks star has made a campy spot for the former Arkansas governor. Hey, maybe the Huckster will have more luck with a campaign based on irony than old-fashioned American values.

Without Clark Hoyt, the New York Times would still be claiming denial was a river in Egypt.

For the past two weeks, the Times has pretended that it didn’t do anything wrong by running an ad from MoveOn.org at a discounted rate. The September 10th “General Petraeus or General Betray Us?” ad has been fodder for Republicans since it ran.

Yesterday, the Public Editor agreed with Republicans and said that the ad violated two Times house rules. MoveOn was given the standard discounted rate for a floating date advertisement, even though the Times promised the ad would run on the tenth. The Times ad policy also states, “We do not accept opinion advertisements that are attacks of a personal nature,” which the MoveOn ad was.

MoveOn wired the $77,000 price difference between the two ad rates to the Times today. Of course, the interest rate on the discount will be attacks on the liberal media for the next five months.

Ever fondled a child? Been incorrectly pegged as a size 16? Lied about your alma mater to get your wedding announcement in the Times? If so, there’s an excellent chance your life is already as good as over. Either that or Clark Hoyt is just short on material this week.

As the New York Times‘ third public editor, Knight Ridder vet Clark Hoyt is making the newsroom tour. Introducing himself, answering questions, sharing cupcakes. He even made it as far away as Washington, D.C. (monuments!) to talk to the Times‘ bureau there, which is the bureau responsible for escalating Tony Snow’s blood pressure and other matters of import.

So how’d Clark fair?

CONTINUED »

The notoriously enterprising Jacob Bernstein sics his fangs into the new Times public editor, Clark Hoyt, in today’s Women’s Wear — and he’s not letting go until he at least has the scent of blood. After all, Hoyt is a newspaper veteran who’s gone on record talking about how the newspaper industry could be facing its demise, and here he is in a new gig waxing critical about the Grey Lady! It’s sport.

CONTINUED »