Mother of Nightmare Jobs

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:04 am

Jill Abramson, the managing editor for news, ... and Bill Keller, the executive editor, said last week that they would now assign an editor to monitor opinion media and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies. (New York Times)

*** Looks like a new tactic to get rid of an unpopular editor. ***

Bumfketeer · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 10:25 am

This job is listed as Class WTF in the Guild contract.

Editer · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 3:56 pm

Keller in his own words:

Quote:

We haven’t assigned someone to be in charge of “opinion media.” We’ve asked a colleague who happens to be a voracious consumer of online political buzz to help us (meaning me and Jill) informally, stay current with what issues are erupting, right and left. The responsibility for covering the subject still resides with the reporters on those beats, their editors, and ultimately me and Jill.

jjmoney62 · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:49 pm

Quote:

Keller declined to identify the editor, saying he wanted to spare that person “a bombardment of e-mails and excoriation in the blogosphere.”

Editer · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 5:56 pm

Good move.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Mon Sep 28, 2009 7:13 pm

Quote:

We haven’t assigned someone to be in charge of “opinion media.” We’ve asked a colleague who happens to be a voracious consumer of online political buzz to help us (meaning me and Jill) informally, stay current with what issues are erupting, right and left.

*** So the "public editor" was wrong? No one was assigned? ***

Rio · **Posted:** Tue Sep 29, 2009 1:20 am

Whether an editor was "assigned" the job or not, the gist is, someone there now has to watch Fox News Channel to keep up with stories that the AP and the Times' own reporters are missing — or simply refusing to cover.

I at least give the Times credit for admitting it dropped the ball on the ACORN scandal.

Phillip Blanchard · **Posted:** Tue Sep 29, 2009 6:55 am

Watching the TV was the job of the editorial clerks at most of the newspapers I've worked for, at least until someone thought it was a good idea to suspend a screen from the ceiling every 10 feet or so, distracting people who were trying to work.

fev · **Joined:** Tue Nov 15, 2005 1:04 pm **Posts:** 371

I'm glad the Times is keeping up with what the fair-n-balanced gang is doing. I hope the Times won't confuse the Fox agenda with "news." People who still have trouble distinguishing between the two concepts are encouraged to admire the question design in the latest Fox poll. For example:

Do you think Barack Obama's travel and speaking schedule makes him look more like he is a candidate on the campaign trail or more like he is the president of the United States?

Compare to this from July 2007:

How do you think President Bush should decide how to proceed in Iraq--should he follow his gut instincts about what is right or follow public opinion polls?

Sounds like a dream job, actually, as long as the Times is paying for the hand sanitizers and stuff.

B Cubbison · **Posted:** Fri Oct 02, 2009 8:44 am

The NYT editor who was given this task should be reporting on what he or she finds, perhaps on the Op-Ed page, instead of doing it in secret. It could be a relevant new role for the outdated syndicated columnist.

And I would nominate fev.

Rio · **Posted:** Sat Oct 03, 2009 3:06 am

fev wrote:

I'm glad the Times is keeping up with what the fair-n-balanced gang is doing. I hope the Times won't confuse the Fox agenda with "news."

Yeah. God forbid that the august New York Times confuse the (latest) ACORN scandal with "news." Everyone knows the real news is what the Obama girls will write in their "What I Did This Summer" essays.

Testy Copy Editors

Mother of Nightmare Jobs

Who is online

What They're Saying

Useful Links