Bill Keller, the executive editor, strongly defended Liptak’s column, though he said it contained at least implicit opinion. The mandate of columnists in the news pages “is fundamentally analytical,” he said. “They may have a point of view on an issue, but they are not partisan or ideological. They don’t endorse candidates. They don’t prescribe outcomes. ... They are free to express opinions of a certain type that grow out of a particular expertise and a body of reporting.”Link.
Keller added: “I do think it is important that we maintain the impartiality of the news pages. We do that by rigorously policing the fairness and accuracy of news stories, by clearly labeling material that comes with a point of view, and by confining outright advocacy and partisanship to the opinion pages.”
This insight of the way the Times operates of course raises questions:
What's wrong with reliance on facts, impartiality?
Why not a simple story like "McCain Flip Flops Again"? Then, relying on facts, there'd be no need for a reporter to waste time and focus sticking his opinion into the matter.
And of course, usually a well-reported story can be understood without any gratuitous opinion.
And how does the Miller debacle jibe with Keller's position?
Really, if yellow/tabloid journalism is so many turds, the Pinch/Keller Times is merely a gold-plated turd.
No comments:
Post a Comment