September 19, 2013

"The Financial Times Wrote a Tina Brown Puff Piece."

"We've Annotated It."

6 comments:

EDH said...

Tends to amplify the down-side of the FT's "pay wall" when other publications can lambaste its journalism and most potential readers can't/won't bother to access the original content to judge for themselves.

Caroline Walker said...

"Let them eat newsprint!"

Xmas said...

You know, I don't think it's Tina Brown that's the problem here. It's that reporters have lost so much clout that they can't use their credentials to get things done.

It's the reporters own fault. They've been so cowed by their own fears of losing access, that they've lost access. Ms. Brown was trying to convey her cachet and authority onto her reporters. That failed because reporters are failing, not Ms. Brown.

Reporting should be a kinetic and active job. Reporters should be out interviewing and investigating, not sitting at a desk typing out emails and bitter twitter posts. They should be fighting to put their good stories at the top of the page or the front of the magazine. The arrival of an active and kinetic chief editor should not be a disruption to the newsroom. She should be a perfect match to the energy that's already there.

Marty Keller said...

The take-down was so gentle as to be punchless. Given the target-rich environment that is Tina Brown, one is forced to ask, why bother? Oh, but it's the New Republic, so it has to be careful lest she someday become another of its revolving editors.

Strelnikov said...

A puerile and petty attempt to out snark a similarly over the top hagiography. Not sure which is worse.

Sam L. said...

Does anyone really care about Tina?