Poynter Online
Go


Top Story

Public TV, Radio Stations to Increase Local Investigative Coverage
Most Recent Articles
1.Poynter's Times Publishing Co. sells Governing
5:15 PM Nov. 20, 2009
2.Recommendation for Fewer PAP Screens Sure to Set Off Controversy
10:32 AM Nov. 20, 2009
3.Gene Patterson to Jack Nelson: Save Us a Desk Up There in That Celestial Newsroom
7:03 AM Nov. 20, 2009
4.Public TV, Radio Stations to Increase Local Investigative Coverage
6:19 AM Nov. 20, 2009
5.Woods: Plagiarism Never Justified
3:47 PM Nov. 19, 2009
Most E-mailed
Recent Comments
Recent Tags
Community Activity

Poynter Training
Poynter Seminars
Small, in-person training experiences.
1.
A New Curriculum for a New Journalism - Jan. 6-8, 2010
Apply by November 23
2.
Multimedia Journalism for College Educators - February 1-5, 2010
Apply by December 14
3.
NewsU: Write Your Heart Out: The Craft of the Personal Essay - January 25-February 19, 2010
Apply by January 4
News University
Today's most popular courses on NewsU, Poynter's e-learning site for journalists.
Webinars
Our online classroom is just a click away. Learn more.
All Webinars

Poynter Forums

View Forum Post

Topic: Letters Sent to Romenesko
Date/Time: 7/1/2008 2:55:51 PM
Title: Re the Hoyt-Collins brouhaha
Posted By: Jim Romenesko
 
From JOHN MAGGS: The only interesting thing about Clark Hoyt and Gail Collins scrapping on Maureen Dowd seems to be the underlying dread that the Times Op-Ed page might be dragged ever closer down to the level of degradation for commentary plumbed by cable TV and the Blogosphere.

Both seem to have in mind some personal ideal of the Op-Ed Columnist for a Very Important Newspaper that has never corresponded to reality. Hoyt, who is generally doing a great job, apparently prizes presidential commentary with the above-it-all pose of Scotty Reston, who pretended to treat everyone fairly while secretly advancing the interests of favored politicians. He also seems to want to make the page as boring as it was for long stretches in the 1970s and 1980s

Collins, on the other hand, seems to be afraid that some kind of Internet-fueled vendetta against Dowd might be legitimized by the Public Editor's condemnation. I'm sure Collins got a little nervous when David Brooks and Paul Krugman failed to ignore each other in debating the Reagan legacy and the nastiness spilled onto the Web. Ultimately, this seems to be about the possible loss of authority of the Times Editorial pages; if Times columnists get treated the same way as Ann Coulter, then the Times Op-Ed page is just another channel.

The Times Op-Ed page has always been a lot less, and in other ways more than these two think. Along with the late-blooming of Peggy Noonan, one of the most pleasant surprises in this campaign has been the revival of Dowd, who had been all but unreadable since 1999 (even in her Pulitzer year, to me.) Without the original thinking and penterating insight, her snark was solipsism, but Hillary seems have gotten Dowd's brain working again.

Hoyt seems to think that columnists ahould be "fair", but they never are -- they are biased in a smooth and unacknowleged way, such as McCain confidante William Kristol, or in Dowd's more obvious fashion. The truth is that we always know we are getting reality filtered through the Id and ego of the columnist -- it isn't argumentation, so much as a few minutes listening to them on the couch. And in Dowd's case, the sense that she is on and sometimes over the edge is part of the fun.

And that is why Hoyt is on the wrong track asking whether a man would get away with what Dowd is doing, and Collins is too when she implies that sexism is afoot when criticizing Dowd's fevered thoughts on Mrs. Clinton. When Dowd was going crazy in the 1990s on Bill Clinton, we understood that she was getting revenge on every smooth-talking liar who disappointed her. In fact, Dowd told us this. And when she goes nuts about Hillary, we know she is really expressing something deep about her own experiences and choices in life. It ain't fair, but it sure is interesting.

Meanwhile, Gail Collins should relax and realize that she can't prevent the Times from being affected by the Foxification of commentary, which is driven by the readership and not the medium.

View Complete Forum Topic

Username
Password
New User? Signup Now
Poynter Careers
See All Jobs
Add Your Resume
Post Your Job
Become a Member
More media jobs