No need to tell me that you've never liked the NYT. I'm trying to focus on the change since they ousted Abramson last May. Remember, just before she was fired last April, there was an incident, reported in Politico, in which she'd "called Dean Baquet into her office to complain" that the NYT "wasn’t 'buzzy' enough," she blamed Baquet, and "Baquet burst out of Abramson’s office, slammed his hand against a wall and stormed out of the newsroom."
In the ensuing power struggle, Baquet got Abramson's job as executive editor, and now we are seeing the results: Not buzzy enough!
I go to the NYT site every day, looking for things to read and, I hope, to blog. I'm finding myself skimming over the front page and then leaving. I can't pinpoint what was there before that pulled me in — perhaps it was overly skewed toward aging, affluent, white females like me — but I'm not going in and hanging around.
IN THE COMMENTS: Big Mike said:
BTW, if you keep owning up to 'aging' then we're gonna have to revoke your status as Baby Boomer. Keep this in mind: we never age!Here's my take on that, from last year, when I was younger (and so were you):
पोस्ट्स
२६ टिप्पण्या:
Maybe Jill and Dean both are bad executive editors. Time to bring in Tina Brown
What kinds of stories are now missing, Prof? Have you looked at a representative sample of things you ended up blogging from back when Abramson was editor and done a search for similar material on the NYTimes recently? I'm not sure how you're defining "buzzy" and without that it's difficult to evaluate the assertion.
Your mistake may be looking at the front page. I used to get the WaPo but, some years ago, I subconsciously developed the habit of not even looking at the front page because all of the real news was buried inside. When I realized what I was doing, I cancelled my subscription.
It's just you.
Read the NYT on subjects you know --> realize the misinformation and/or lies
Read the NYT on other subjects --> still incorrect but perhaps you fool yourself into believing otherwise
Political rags make more mistakes than apolitical rags because assumptions remain unquestioned.
I stopped reading the NYT when I noticed that the Bush-bashing had infected even the travel and cooking sections.
Entertainment is like a little salt needed to make the meal tasty. For example, the New Yorker always salts their magazine.
The NYT is trying to appear needed rather than be entertaining. But no one needs propaganda.
Jill we hardly knew you. Please take a Fox News job so we can hear entertaining liberal balance from you again.
The real news is coming from other places, like the story about Gruber. Where in the MSM are you going to see that ?
You mean it sucks even worse these days? Glad I never read it. Bad enough that we get the Post at home, but at least it does a good job lining the bottom of the bird cage.
perhaps it was overly skewed toward aging, affluent, white females like me
BTW, if you keep owning up to "aging" then we're gonna have to revoke your status as Baby Boomer. Keep this in mind: we never age!
If you had invested $100,000 in NYT stock 10 years ago and never sold, you would now have $32,880.
I look forward to the day it goes bankrupt.
Here is a link to a 10 year chart of NYT.
http://bigcharts.marketwatch.com/advchart/frames/frames.asp?show=&insttype=Stock&symb=nyt&time=13&startdate=1%2F4%2F1999&enddate=7%2F25%2F2014&freq=1&compidx=aaaaa%3A0&comptemptext=&comp=none&ma=0&maval=9&uf=0&lf=1&lf2=0&lf3=0&type=2&style=320&size=2&x=34&y=11&timeFrameToggle=false&compareToToggle=false&indicatorsToggle=false&chartStyleToggle=false&state=8
Has it ever not been boring? Coulda fooled me.
NYT stock has more than doubled off its May, 2012 low.
Especially if your sister shoots you.
Now, I'm assuming it was just a BB gun, or something like that.
I have a huge scar on my arm from my brother. He was chasing me and I fell and caught the arm on a slate, and it pealed back the skin very nicely. Still can feel the doctor cutting the flap of skin off.
I watched Greta interview Jill. Jill has an annoying speaking style.Is that a from something medical or is that a more common thing?
the NYT sure got Montana pols buzzing with the Walsh story! Planted by our oppo research, we were told in the Lee papers today.
I don't read it any more. I even ditched the Sunday edition in favor of the Weekend WSJ and the Financial Times weekend edition. Either is better than the NYT and together are all that is needed.
It was already bad under the affronted woman editor. Probably OK if you are a local.
I never read the NYT before or after Jill A.
WHAT DIFFERENCES, AT THIS POINT, DOES IT MAKE??????????
Bob seems actually charming in that clip.
Well done "Anne".
Thank you for the tag, Professor, but haven't you or Bob read any of the "Forty is the New Sixty" type articles?
(Er, make that "Sixty is the New Forty")
oops
You keep saying Buzzy abd I have this image inmy head now of Abramson beating errant employees senseless on a park bench with her purse...
Baquet has a lot of job security. There's no way Sulzberger could ever fire him. If I were Baquet, I wouldn't let my job interfere with a balanced domestic life and an improved golf handicap.
Once Modo made them all swear off the pot candy bars, it's been all Krugman ever since.
I thought they had a great article on the value of tests, mini-tests, done not right away to test and exercise retrieval. They had a reassuring article on 'happiness iss 'involvement with people and not pleasure' recently. They had a good article of John Le Carre on his meeting Hoffman on the set of the movie adaptation of Carre's book. Favorite sentence, though it is not to the point of Hoffman. 'He thought to tell him that his performance of Capote was the best acting he had ever seen but then didn't because if you tell an actor how great his performance was in something 8 years ago, he'll immediately want to know what you haven't liked his later work.'
टिप्पणी पोस्ट करा