Clarification re: NYT and Bret Stephens

["Dave Farber" <dave () farber net>]

---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Dave Burstein <daveb () dslprime com>
Date: Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 1:21 PM
Subject: Clarification re: NYT and Bret Stephens
To: Dave Farber <dave () farber net>


Dave

I would have taken this offlist, but Crocker's comment suggests I was
misleading.

I absolutely am not suggesting the *Times *would be right giving Stephens
substantial space for his climate change opinions; a single oped or similar
might be appropriate for an unlikely point of view, but not a regular
column.

In particular, I'm not suggesting the Times should be hiring Stephens
because of an obligation to give denialists more space, much less create
space for more reporting from the point of view of ISIS, his inference.

Rather, I'm saying that someone like Stephens should not be blacklisted
because of his opinion on one subject - climate - that probably won't be
much if any of his coverage. Even if he's a nut on the subject.

I don't believe that a (probably badly mistaken) opinion about one subject
shouldn't mean someone shouldn't be hired to (mostly) write about other
things.

If that person has demonstrated quality work in other ways. (Stephens has a
Pulitzer and I'm sure they looked closely about whether he was thoughtful
and articulate on most subjects.)

I checked and the *Times* says they are hiring for other work, not a focus
on climate.

"He’s a beautiful writer who ranges across politics, international affairs,
culture and business, and, for The Times, he will bring a new perspective
to bear on the news,"

I.e. they aren't hiring him to focus on climate change and I'd expect if he
narrowed his coverage like that they'd ask him to leave.

For example, I found Kevin Martin's ideas on FCC regulation of cable, how
to bring broadband to rural North Carolina, and how to cut waste in
Universal Service not just interesting but usually right on target. He put
his career on the line supporting Net Neutrality based on taking Dave
Clark's opinion over the opinion of most of his friends and President.

On the other hand, Kevin was a major Bush operative and probably shared his
friends' support of the war in Iraq, something I considered a crime. My
understanding on FCC issues is better because I didn't ignore his
thoughtful work on other topics.

Dave

-- 
Editor, Fast Net News, 5GW News, Net Policy News and DSL Prime
Author with Jennie Bourne  DSL (Wiley) and Web Video: Making It Great,
Getting It Noticed (Peachpit)



-------------------------------------------
Archives: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/247/=now
RSS Feed: https://www.listbox.com/member/archive/rss/247/18849915-ae8fa580
Modify Your Subscription: https://www.listbox.com/member/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-aa268125
Unsubscribe Now: 
https://www.listbox.com/unsubscribe/?member_id=18849915&id_secret=18849915-32545cb4&post_id=20170423132332:8FF9D564-2849-11E7-A477-A4D9A39CD943
Powered by Listbox: http://www.listbox.com