AdAge pundit Simon Dumenco, argues Dan Okrent, lives too far inside the bubble to understand the needs of a newspaper-reading American public.

When the media beater published a column this week questioning the need for papers to continue keeping an ombudsman on staff, the industry cried foul. And stupid.

Argues Simon: Aren't readers and bloggers sussing out newspapers' errors and bias all by themselves?

Answers former New York Times ombuds Okrent: Um … no.

Writing in to Romenesko, Okrent won't give us a Top Ten list of reasons why Dumenco is wrong – shame! – but does make the fair argument that only "if [sites like] Romenesko were a daily habit of the same millions who earnestly read the New York Times or the Washington Post or any other newspaper that has an ombud" could papers do away with a reader watchdog.

Until then, there's Clark Hoyt, responding to readers' concerns about there being too much sex in the Times, and this rabid ombudsman acting as the Dumenco watchdog.

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 »

Jayson who? The NYT is hoping you'll have forgotten that guy's name by now, as it gets ready to effectively dismiss the position of public editor, which began in the Jayson Blair fallout with Dan Okrent leading the charge of headmaster.

When Barney Calame's two-year tenure expires in May, New York Times exec editor Bill Keller may or may not give the job to someone new. Because the whole breathing down Times staffers' necks is so 2004.

“Over the next couple of months, as Barney’s term enters the home stretch, I’ll be taking soundings from the staff, talking it over with the masthead, and consulting with Arthur,” meaning publisher Arthur O. Sulzberger Jr., wrote Bill Keller, The Times’ executive editor, in an e-mail to The Observer.

Naturally, everyone but Calame's assistant Joseph Plambeck is eager to hear that the jig is up — that there will be no more inches developed to chronicling what reporters are doing wrong. That, and Sulzberger & Co. can finally reclaim some editorial space to do some more preaching.

Sure, it's not the tell-all tome we've been passively-aggressively anticipating from Steve Florio, but ex-NYT ombudsman Daniel Okrent's manuscript – arriving at bookstores on May 15 – is one we'll nevertheless be pouring over. Probably not for the recycled columns during his tenure as the most hated man on West 43rd (which makes up most of the books), but for that bitchy preface that actually names names.

The book, published by Public Affairs, is largely a collection of his columns during that period, with brief updates, but it also includes a lengthy preface. Here Okrent describes some of his behind-the-scenes battles and offers personal assessments of individuals and the overall newsroom culture. He is often critical but also fond of what he calls "our one truly essential newspaper." He concludes that his proudest accomplishment was: "The Times chose to continue the public editor experiment by appointing another one."

Though while they opted to continue the gig (with the blasé Barney Calame), it's still not fair to stay whether the continuing of the position was an Okrent's achievement, or, as business reporter David Cay Johnston might argue, his crowning failure.

New Book by Former 'NYT' Public Editor Offers Candid Reflections [E&P]