Cogent analysis and sensible commentary, Richard. Just one factual heads-up about the column in which Dan Okrent said that "of course" The Times is a liberal paper.
That July 25, 2004 piece wasn't his last, as you say, but just his last before a month-long break. "I'm going to spend August in a deck chair and see if I can once again read The Times like a civilian. See you after Labor Day," it concludes.
His Sunday columns continued through May 22, 2005.
I'll just say that I disagree with one point on Dick this week, and that's the interpretation of the cartoon. I'm not alone, and I wasn't alone at the time. I thought there was illiberalism the NYT faced over running it, the type that, on this issue, arises in New York City but actually not so much in Tel Aviv. Enough said.
Related, contra Bennet? No, if Bennet's referring to Claudine Gay in the second-last graf, what she lost control of is the Harvard Corporation. As for everything running up to that, the many articles at Mondoweiss are a good antidote to Bennet.
On Dick's other point, about the NYT increasing op-ed diversity? By all means. Let me know when they have some leftist, not "liberal" commentariat. I won't be holding my breath.
For clarity, and because one attentive reader has already raised it, Sen. Cotton attended the Army's eight-week Ranger training course, which entitled him to wear a Ranger tab on his uniform. But he did not serve in the Ranger regiment. Details here: https://www.military.com/daily-news/2021/01/24/you-shouldnt-be-calling-yourself-ranger-tom-cottons-military-service-under-scrutiny-fellow-army-vet.html
Great piece! Gave me a lot to think about. My only real gripe about Bennett's article was that it could have said just as much in 1/8th the space.
A crystalline analysis of a profoundly murky subject.
I appreciated this analysis of the Bennett piece.
Appreciated reading this analysis and hope the Times continues to strive towards objectivity and balance.
Cogent analysis and sensible commentary, Richard. Just one factual heads-up about the column in which Dan Okrent said that "of course" The Times is a liberal paper.
That July 25, 2004 piece wasn't his last, as you say, but just his last before a month-long break. "I'm going to spend August in a deck chair and see if I can once again read The Times like a civilian. See you after Labor Day," it concludes.
His Sunday columns continued through May 22, 2005.
I'll just say that I disagree with one point on Dick this week, and that's the interpretation of the cartoon. I'm not alone, and I wasn't alone at the time. I thought there was illiberalism the NYT faced over running it, the type that, on this issue, arises in New York City but actually not so much in Tel Aviv. Enough said.
Related, contra Bennet? No, if Bennet's referring to Claudine Gay in the second-last graf, what she lost control of is the Harvard Corporation. As for everything running up to that, the many articles at Mondoweiss are a good antidote to Bennet.
On Dick's other point, about the NYT increasing op-ed diversity? By all means. Let me know when they have some leftist, not "liberal" commentariat. I won't be holding my breath.