WELCOME to the debut of “The Truth Is!”, a blog of reporting and commentary that aims to be informative, thoughtful and provocative. At least initially, the blog will have a strong heartland flavor by virtue of the connection of a number of us to Cowles family journalism. I am former editor of the Des Moines Register’s opinion pages. Another contributor, Michael Gartner, is former editor of the paper; he later served as president of NBC News. Another former Register editor who has agreed to contribute, Geneva Overholser, is director of the University of Southern California’s Annenberg school of journalism. Followers of the blog will have access also to the work of Herbert Strentz of Des Moines, a close Register and other newspaper watcher who once headed Drake University’s journalism school. Bill Leonard, a longtime Register editorial writer, will add insights.

“The Truth Is!” will be supervised by my daughter, Marcia Wolff, a communications lawyer for 20 years with Arnold and Porter (Washington, D.C.). Invaluable technical assistance in assembling and maintaining the blog is provided by my grandsons Julian Cranberg, a college first-year, and Daniel Wolff, a high school senior.

If you detect a whiff of nepotism in this operation, so be it. All of it is strictly a labor of love. —Gil Cranberg

Thursday, June 13, 2013

Gilbert Cranberg: CARELESS EDITING AT THE TIMES

Anonymous personal attacks are supposed to be verboten in the New York Times. As recently as March 21, 2009, the paper’s then public editor, Clark Hoyt, wrote that the paper “will not allow personal or partisan attacks from behind a mask of anonymity”, and affirmed, “I think it is time again for a forceful rededication to the newspaper’s own standards.” Agreed Bill Keller, then the top editor at the Times, “we need to do better”. 
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/03/22/opinion/22pubed.html

So why, in a front-page story in the June 2 Times, were “some in the West Wing” allowed “to privately tell associates they wish” attorney general Eric Holder would step down? The nameless West Wingers were said to regard Holder as “politically maladroit.” Further, according “to some presidential aides” quoted in the same story, ”the White House is apoplectic” about Holder.

These are not even arguably neutral comments. Rather, they are clearly and wholly negative, and all uttered without benefit of attribution. 

It’s not as though the Times is without policy guidance. It has thought through the issue of anonymous sources and produced a set of excellent policies for its staffers. http://www.nytco.com/company/business_units/sources.html It’s just that, despite layers of editing, mistakes make their way through the filters and into print. 

It’s time that the Times ran out of patience and makes it clear to staffers that its policies are intended to be followed. A good way to impress staffers that editors mean business is to lift the veil of anonymity that protects those who fail to adhere to Times policies. 

The Holder story is a good place to start. The Times public editor should track the negative quotes about Holder to their source and identify, in house, those who enabled it to reach readers in the form it did. 

That would be the kind of “forceful rededication” Clark Hoyt must have had in mind. Otherwise, look for still more careless, and hurtful, editing in the Times.

No comments: