Expect big NYT news in 2013

 America, Economics, Internets, Journalism  No Responses »
Dec 252012
 

gang attackBy Agnes T. Crane/Reuters
Expect the Ochs-Sulzbergers to make headlines in their own New York Times in 2013. The family that controls the U.S. paper of record has loyally seen it through some dark days. With the Gray Lady now on sturdier financial ground, they have a better chance to find a safe custodian at a decent price – maybe someone like billionaire New York Mayor Michael Bloomberg. The window of opportunity could close quickly.After unloading peripheral businesses like About.com, the Times has about $1 billion of cash. Debt and pension obligations also amount to around $1 billion, but the overall operations are profitable and should generate about $175 million of EBIT next year. Owners long starved of dividends, led by the Ochs-Sulzbergers, will want them restored.The dozens of family members, who own about 15 percent of the $1.2 billion company but control it with super-voting shares, should consider going a step further. In five years, they’ve collectively lost on paper half their Times-based fortune. Those eager to remain custodians of the heirloom could see their numbers dwindle as relatives cash out.Beyond some sense of responsibility to their ancestors, it’s hard to see why they wouldn’t all opt to sell. Despite a more stable balance sheet and nearly 600,000 digital subscribers, the outlook isn’t necessarily bright. The industry’s advertising revenue has tumbled by half in just seven years and is still shrinking. The digital side can’t help fast enough. The ratio of print losses to online ad gains clock in at a dismal 19-to-one. Shutting down the Times’ costly print operations now would damage newsroom morale and the newspaper’s clout, but the step is inevitable. The right owner could see it through that difficult period, as well as preserve both the family’s and the newspaper’s legacy. Bloomberg is one candidate, Warren Buffett is another. Waiting too long could eventually leave the company as a more distressed seller. Instead, by negotiating from a relative position of strength, the Ochs-Sulzbergers stand a better chance of securing not only their own fates, but that of the New York Times.

 Posted by at 11:05

Crunch time for the NYT

 America, Journalism  No Responses »
Nov 112012
 

Arthur Sulzberger has so far given a vote of confidence to his long-awaited pick to succeed Janet Robinson Yet, at this moment, there has to be much hand-wringing among Sulzberger and those closest to him. Within the next 36 hours, he must make a new decision. Go forward with the person he’s long sought to double down on the Times’ global, digital strategy push “The Newsonomics of the New York Times’ Expanding Global Strategy“ or decide that the potential cost to the institution of the Times makes it impossible to give Thompson a key to his new office.I expect the latter. It’s a hugely difficult decision. Yet, the global value of the Times’ brand and its trustworthiness must trump any one person’s job or future.

via For Times Sake Mark Thompson Should Step Aside | NYTimes eXaminer.

 Posted by at 11:40

Incoming!

 America, Britain, Journalism  No Responses »
Oct 242012
 

By MARGARET SULLIVAN, public editor of the NYT:

One of the most difficult challenges for news organizations is reporting on what goes on inside their own corporate walls. Two global media companies, the BBC and The New York Times, are dealing with that challenge right now, as a complicated sexual abuse scandal – with a media scandal component — unfolds in Britain.

On Tuesday, the director general of the BBC, George Entwistle, was grilled by Parliament about his role in the events at the well-respected British media company.

A tough investigative committee is raking him over the coals about whether he knew what was going on when the BBC killed an investigative segment on its “Newsnight” program about a celebrity TV personality, Jimmy Savile, accused of sexually abusing hundreds of young girls. Mr. Savile died last year.

Killing the story has impugned the BBC’s integrity.

Mr. Entwistle, though, was not the director general of the BBC when all of this was going on last year.

That was Mark Thompson, who is now the incoming president and chief executive officer of The New York Times Company. Mr. Thompson was said to be in the Times building on Monday for preliminary meetings, but he hasn’t started yet. In fact, Times reporters and editors were reminded on Monday in a style note not to refer to him in articles as the current president and chief executive:

Mr. Thompson will be the president and C.E.O. of The New York Times Company starting Nov. 12, per Robert Christie, senior vice president of corporate communications. Until then, he is still “incoming.”

The style note even resulted in a correction on the Web site of The Times.

To its credit, The Times is reporting this story regularly through its London bureau, and has displayed it several times on the Web site’s home page. The London article was summarized in a brief on the front page on Tuesday.

Mr. Thompson has been quoted repeatedly saying he knew nothing about the investigation being conducted by the “Newsnight” program, or at least that he was never formally notified about it. Here’s The Guardian’s report on that.

How likely is it that he knew nothing? A director general of a giant media company is something like a newspaper’s publisher. Would a publisher be very likely to know if an investigation of one of its own people on sexual abuse charges had been killed? The answer to that is not as easy as it sounds. Because of the intentional separation between editorial and business-side operations, publishers usually don’t know about editorial decisions — unless they are very big ones, fraught with legal implications. A Reuters story explores this subject.

And for that matter, how likely is it that the Times Company will continue with its plan to bring Mr. Thompson on as chief executive? (It’s worth noting that as public editor, I have no inside knowledge on such corporate matters.) His integrity and decision-making are bound to affect The Times and its journalism — profoundly. It’s worth considering now whether he is the right person for the job, given this turn of events.

All these questions ought to be asked. I hope The Times rises to the challenge and thoroughly reports what it finds. The Times might start by publishing an in-depth interview with Mr. Thompson exploring what exactly he knew, and when, about what happened at the BBC. What are the implications of these problems for him as incoming Times chief executive? What are the implications for the Times Company to have its new C.E.O. – who needs to deal with many tough business challenges here – arriving with so much unwanted baggage?

As the BBC has found out in the most painful way, for The Times to pull its punches will not be a wise way to go.

 Posted by at 15:01

Dallas Morning News loses its mind

 America, Crazy Editorials, Economics, Journalism, Politics  No Responses »
Sep 302012
 

Candidate Obama, an orator of great skill and cadence, might have overcome everything and put the U.S. on a brighter path. President Obama, unfortunately, fell short of the challenge. The wars have largely faded from headlines, but the economic struggles remain, along with an attendant worry about future federal spending, deficits and debt.

Obama’s Democratic supporters would argue that no one could have succeeded in what he inherited, that the nation’s problems were far more severe than anyone could handle in four years.

We respectfully disagree. On the central issue that will define his presidency — a stalled U.S. economy weighed down by crushing annual deficits and accumulated debt — Obama showed himself to be less leader than follower. While he expended his political capital on new government programs, unemployment stayed at debilitating heights.

For that reason, this newspaper recommends Republican challenger Mitt Romney for president.

http://www.dallasnews.com/opinion/editorials/20120928-we-recommend-mitt-romney-for-president.ece

 Posted by at 10:54

The plan, Jill’s plan

 America, Journalism  No Responses »
May 272012
 

Jill Abramson: The plan, according to her remarks, is to “expand from our core.” That is, to harvest profits organically from the quality work they’re already doing. Some staffers have been put in working groups to find ways to expand and monetize key areas like mobile, engagement, social media, video and international. The Times will also branch into international native-language editions with special news of regional importance, independent of the International Herald Tribune.

via Feel the Pinch! Sans CEO, New York Times Stock Slumps, Labor Battle Grinds On | NYTimes eXaminer.

 Posted by at 11:06

Say it ain’t so

 Dumb People, Journalism  No Responses »
May 112012
 

From NYTimes Examiner

By Alex Kane:

Isabel Kershner’s family tie to pro-government think tank

After the news broke that New York Times Jerusalem bureau chief Ethan Bronner had a son who enlisted in the Israeli army (Extra!, 1/27/10), Times public editor Clark Hoyt noted (2/6/10) that it was problematic for Bronner to continue reporting on “one of the world’s most intense” conflicts while his son took up arms for one side. Hoyt spoke to a former Times Jerusalem bureau chief, David Shipler, who stressed the importance of disclosing this relationship to readers.

Bronner is now close to the end of his tenure in Jerusalem. But two years after that controversy, theNew York Times has yet to learn the importance of disclosure. And the concealed relationship again concerns a Times reporter who writes from Jerusalem: This time, it’s correspondent Isabel Kershner.

Kershner has a record of misleading reporting (Extra!, 7/10, 4/11, 1/12) that reflects the New York Times’ bias toward the Israeli government perspective.

But even more damning is this: Her husband, Hirsh Goodman, works for the Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) as a senior research fellow and director of the Charles and Andrea Bronfman Program on Information Strategy, tasked with shaping a positive image of Israel in the media. An examination of articles that Kershner has written or contributed to since 2009 reveals that she overwhelmingly relies on the INSS for think tank analysis about events in the region.

The INSS is well-connected to both the Israeli government and its military. Many of its associates come from government or military careers; its website boasts of the group’s “strong association with the political and military establishment.” In 2010, according to INSS financial documents, the Israeli government gave the institute about $72,000.

The Israeli newspaper Ha’aretz (10/5/08) identified INSS-produced papers as backing the “Dahiyah doctrine,” an Israeli military doctrine that calls for disproportionate force to be used on civilian infrastructure in Gaza and Lebanon during operations against Hamas and Hezbollah. The doctrine was applied in 2008–09 during Israel’s invasion of Gaza, and was cited, along with the INSS papers, in the UN Goldstone report, which accused Israel of committing possible war crimes (9/25/09).

Goodman’s job within that context is spin. “The media is of strategic importance in a political and military conflict, since it has a formative influence on the degree of legitimacy that each side enjoys,” he writes in an explanation of the Bronfman Program on the INSS website. “Israel must devise a strategy to impact positively on international and Arab public opinion and overall disseminate its message more effectively.”

The INSS is certainly disseminating its message effectively in the Times. From 2009–12, there were 17 articles Kershner wrote or contributed to where officials from the INSS were quoted, far more than other comparable think tanks Kershner uses for analysis. Over the same time period, for example, the Shasha Center of Hebrew University was quoted two times and the National Security Studies Center at the University of Haifa was quoted once.

It’s normal, of course,for Kershner to have sources in a well-connected and respected institution like the INSS, and she has never used her husband as a source. But it’s extraordinary to report on Israel/Palestine without ever disclosing to readers the tie Kershner has to someone in the heart of Israel’s security establishment whose job is precisely to make sure that Israel receives favorable media coverage.

Media ethics expert Kevin Smith, the chair of the Society of Professional Journalists’ Ethics Committee and an instructor at James Madison University, says that Kershner’s case is a “basic ethics 101 lesson.” In an email, Smith explained: “Repeatedly going to that agency for information still raises serious questions…. The relationship that develops here is not healthy for unbiased news coverage. It’s too awash with personal connections.”

He added that, “at the very least, disclosure is demanded…. You cannot expect trust or to maintain credibility from the public when, before they read a word of your copy, you have engaged in an act of deception by not disclosing your potential conflicts.”

The New York Times’ own ethics code recognizes the problems such a situation raises. “Staff members must be sensitive that direct political activity by their spouses…may well create conflicts of interest or the appearance of conflicts,” one section states. “If newsroom management considers the problem serious, the staff member may have to withdraw from certain coverage. Sometimes an assignment may have to be modified or a beat changed.”

Kershner’s situation, like Bronner’s, also illustrates that many Western journalists covering Israel/Palestine are enmeshed within Israeli society, and Israeli society only—hardly a recipe for fair and inclusive coverage of the conflict.

“While it would be convenient to think otherwise, there is no question that this deep personal integration into Israeli society informs our overall understanding and coverage,” one unnamed Jerusalem bureau chief told Israeli-based British journalist and author Jonathan Cook, explaining Western media bias in Israel/Palestine (CounterPunch, 2/25/10).

Kershner’s case should be seen as the emblem of this “deep personal integration.” At the very least, there should be transparency about her family ties.

Alex Kane is a staff reporter for Mondoweiss and the World editor at AlterNet. Follow him on Twitter@alexbkane.

 Posted by at 21:48
 Older Entries