The New York Times and the N&O versus facts

The public editor of New York Times today set off a firestorm in the blogosphere for asking a ridiculous question about whether the paper should become a "truth vigilante" in producing news for its vaunted pages. Thousands of comments have poured into the paper's website, the vast majority of which could be summed up with a single word: Duh.

As a journalism school grad and the husband of a J-school professor, I followed the discussion with much interest and occasional amusement, until I came across a diary at Daily Kos tonight which had me rolling on the floor. Well, not literally rolling on the floor, more like chuckling.

If you're in the mood for some serious snark, take a look, and them come back so I can wrap up this post for you.

One particular section of the Kos diary caught my attention, and not just my funny bone. It reminded my of a concern I've had for years about the News and Observer's reliance on Art Pope's Magical Opinion Manufacturing Machine for "expert" sources in political news coverage.

From the Daily Kos diary:

Perhaps we could start off by recognizing that an ideological think tank with a vested interest in fudging the numbers is not the go-to place to go for those assertions or those refutations to begin with.

You probably won't be surprised to know that in the N&O's world of outsourcing, downsizing, and pressure-cooking, think tanks with a vested interest in fudging the numbers have long been part of business as usual. Indeed, the paper's publisher, John Drescher, defended the practice just last year:

"I think he's (Protzman) underestimating the quality of the work that the Locke Foundation does. I think they do some research that's worth writing about, and I think that's true from groups on the left also," Drescher says. "I guess he's advocating that we ignore a group that's become a major force in North Carolina politics, and that would seem kind of odd to me."

To which I replied:

No, Mr. Drescher. I'm not advocating that you ignore them. I'm advocating that you challenge and question the fact that a multimillionaire ideologue has been able to buy nearly monopolistic control over your political coverage and editorial page.

Just to be clear, the N&O's political coverage and the editorial page reflect two different sides of Art Pope's influence, raising very different concerns. The problem with the editorial page is a "concentration of voices" problem, with the paper continuing to use Rick Martinez as a columnist, even though Martinez is a big cheese at WPTF (the voice of conservative talk radio in Raleigh) and the husband of an employee of Art Pope.

All that said, I'm cautiously optimistic that political coverage at the N&O could improve in 2012, and become less reliant on Art Pope's water carriers. There's at least one new reporter in the N&O lineup, who seems to be doing a decent job steering clear of the Show. On the editorial side, all we can do is hope that 2012 will see the N&O trade in Rick Martinez for a different right-wing shill who doesn't happen to be sleeping with one of Pope's minions. You know how they like to be fair and balanced.

To my knowledge.