NYT public editor raises a question, gets blasted

On Thursday morning, New York Times public editor Arthur Brisbane asked whether and when Times reporters should challenge “facts” asserted by newsmakers. Reaction to his post came fast:

[Brisbane's post] should be put on the wall of a museum to explain contemporary US journalism.

That the NYT even has to ask is remarkable, and depressing.

Disappointed that NYT ombud (a friend) merely asks whether Times reporters should say when people are lying.

Oy. What has journalism come to when the NYT wonders if its reporters should report the truth?

Missed the announcement that the NYT was outsourcing public editor duties to the Onion this week.

Your thoughts?

* Should the Times be a truth vigilante?
* Yes, NYT should definitely be a truth vigilante

Comments

comments

1 comment
  1. I’m waiting for the Times’ reporters to challenge “facts” from the Times’ columnists and editors. That, like x number of lawyers at the bottom of the ocean, would be “a good start.”