New York Times Eliminating Public Editor Position
When The New York Times created the job of public editor, at the recommendation of a committee tasked with a journalism scandal at the newspaper, the newspaper’s executive editor Bill Keller described the position as a benefit to the newspaper and its credibility. It represents “a pair of professional eyes, familiar with us but independent of the day-to-day production of the paper, can make us more sensitive on matters of fairness and accuracy, and enhance our credibility,” he said.
Those eyes will soon be permanently shut. The newspaper today announced it is discontinuing the public editor position, even before the term of current editor Liz Spayd is set to end.
Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr. pointed to social media in justifying the move. While the position was once necessary, he insisted, “today, our followers on social media and our readers across the internet have come together to collectively serve as a modern watchdog, more vigilant and forceful than one person could ever be.” The explanation echoed that given several years ago by the Washington Post‘s Marty Baron. “There is ample criticism of our performance from outside sources, entirely independent of the newsroom, and we don’t pay their salaries,” he said.
But Public Editors (or ombudsmen, as they are often called) should not be confused with random critics on Twitter. Unlike most social media users, they’re able to lace up their shoes, walk down the hall, knock on a journalist’s door, and ask pointed questions about this decision or that coverage. As importantly, they can report back to readers about what they heard, and how they assess the response, on the pages of the same newspaper where the article in question appeared.
As Minnesota Public Radio’s Bob Collins wrote about Baron’s comments, “That’s nonsense. Newsrooms don’t really care about public criticism, which is often uninformed, but historically they have cared when someone with some journalism chops questions the decisions.”
Collins said the same about Sulzberger’s statement. “Readers simply do not carry the weight of a fellow journalist where criticism is concerned.”
Other journalists have likewise criticized the decision.
Eliminating the position of Public Editor does not seem like a great idea. Frankly, I'd love to see us add one. https://t.co/JhgxuzhS6y
— Steven Rich (@dataeditor) May 31, 2017
As a former ombudsman and newspaperman, I don't approve.
The New York Times is eliminating the public editor role https://t.co/89H4HMxaz4
— John Scalzi (@scalzi) May 31, 2017
3. The one thing an ombud or public editor can almost always do is hold feet to the fire, and get a real answer out of management.
— Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) May 31, 2017
The @nytimes reasons for getting rid of the public editor either mean they're lying or don't understand the Internet. Tough choice https://t.co/6HMK1OTKVN
— Joan Walsh (@joanwalsh) May 31, 2017
More from SNAPSHOTS
President of Bethlehem Bible College Expresses Thanks for Antisemitic Comment
January 30, 2018
Jack Sara, president of Bethlehem Bible College, either can’t recognize antisemitism when he sees it or is OK with it. In a Facebook discussion underneath one of his articles at The Christian Post, a website [...]
Civilian Bounties, Quartz, Haaretz & Lousy Translations
January 29, 2018
Quartz, which describes itself as "a digitally native news outlet, born in 2012, for business people in the new global economy. We publish bracingly creative and intelligent journalism with a broad worldview," today took heat [...]
Where’s the Coverage? Arab Enrollment in Israeli Universities Grows 78%
January 27, 2018
Part of the campus of Tel Aviv University The number of Arab students in Israeli universities has grown an astonishing 78.5% over the last seven years, according to Israel’s Council for Higher Education (CHE). Although [...]
Is The U.S. State Department Hiding a ‘Game Changer’ Report on Palestinian Refugees?
January 25, 2018
The United Nations Refugee and Works Agency (UNRWA) provides aid to approximately 5.3 million Palestinians which they categorize as “refugees”—but the actual number may be as low as 20,000, according to a Washington Free Beacon [...]
Where’s the Coverage? Palestinian Leader Buys $50 Million Private Jet
January 25, 2018
The President of the Palestinian Authority (PA), Mahmoud Abbas, has bought a private jet worth an estimated $50 million. The purchase comes after widely reported “major funding cuts from the U.S.,” as The Times of [...]
NBC’s Andrea Mitchell Takes Heat for Inaccurate Knesset Tweet
January 22, 2018
After NBC anchor Andrea Mitchell posted an inaccurate and inflammatory comment on Twitter about the Knesset, Israel’s parliament, she was quickly corrected by Israeli journalists. In her Monday morning tweet, Mitchell asserted that “the 13 [...]
Updated: AFP Photo Captions Mislead on Gaza ‘Smuggling Tunnels’
January 17, 2018
Update Appended to Bottom of Post: AFP Removes Misleading Reference to 'Smuggling' Tunnels A series of Agence France Presse photo captions earlier this week misleadingly identified the tunnel discovered under the Kerem Shalom crossing, extending [...]
In English, Haaretz Misleads on Ibrahim Abu Thuraya
January 14, 2018
Update, 8:10 am EST: For Second Time, Haaretz English Edition Corrects on Abu Thuraya’s Leg Injury Despite the fact that Haaretz’s earlier this month corrected a photo caption which inaccurately reported on the unclear circumstances [...]
Where’s the Coverage? Israel Prevented ‘Several Dozen’ Terror Attacks in Europe
January 11, 2018
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu The nation of Israel prevented ‘mass’ terror attacks on the continent of Europe, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Jan. 9, 2018. This admission—made at a meeting of Israel-based [...]