NY Times Public Editor Also Spotlights Balky Coverage of Stories Broken Elsewhere

It turns out that my analysis of the NY Times' cultural coverage (here and here) was more timely than I knew.

In Tuning in Too Late, the NY Times' Public Editor's column today in the "Week in Review" section, Clark Hoyt casts a critical eye on the paper's recent tendency to ignore stories broken by other news organizations (particularly conservative ones) and by blogs. The examples he cited were the ACORN and Van Jones controversies.

My own critique (motivated by a concern for journalistic standards, not political ideology) was pegged to what I know best---the absence of coverage on the paper's arts pages of the Yosi Sergant firestorm (fueled by the conservative news media) and two other important stories---the Cleveland Museum's desire to deviate from donor stipulations, and the NY State Board of Regents' proposed final regulations for deaccessioning---extensively covered (here, here, here and here) on CultureGrrl (which some Times' culture writers do read) but unaccountably missing from "All the News That's Fit to Print."

Regarding the Regents' proposed regulations, for which the comment period closed on Friday, David Palmquist, head of museum chartering for the Regents, informed me:

I am drafting a compilation of all comments for use by State Education Department management, our attorneys and the Regents. The purpose of the public comment period is to inform us as to whether our constituents and the general public are in favor or not in favor of a proposed regulation, and to allow us an opportunity to revisit, discuss, amend, postpone, rescind or go forward with a proposed regulation. Therefore it's not possible today to predict what will be finally advanced and voted on.

If voted on and approved at the Regents' next meeting, Oct. 19-20, the new regs would take effect Nov. 12, according to this announcement.

But back to Hoyt. Today he told Times readers:

Jill Abramson, the managing editor for news, agreed with me that the paper was "slow off the mark," and blamed "insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues that are dominating Fox News and talk radio." She and Bill Keller, the executive editor, said last week that they would now assign an editor to monitor opinion media [blogs included?] and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies.

So they're pleading ignorance? You mean to tell me that these newshounds didn't know from the get-go that these "controversies" were "bubbling"? I don't buy it.

Speaking of bubbling controversies, on Sept. 9, I received an e-mail from Joshua Miller of Fox News, who wanted to talk to me about the Aug. 27 NEA conference call led by the White House's Kalpen Modi, which was meant to to drum up artists' support for the Obama Administration's "United We Serve" initiative.

To read the full text of the e-mail that I sent Josh in reply, click the link below.