First, go to the above linked story in the Sunday LA Times Opinion section where Editorial Page Director Andres Martinez described the proposed changes for the editorial page. The bullet points are below:
* There will be a modest cosmetic redesign.
* On occasion, board members will write, under their byline, "A SoCal Life," articles that reflect on life in this region.
* A box on this page, in the letters space, will appear some days, critiquing editorials in other newspapers.
* Analytical editorials that grapple with fundamental principles underlying a policy debate will be labeled "Framework." These will be archived on our website (latimes.com/opinion) and also in a separate outline by subject matter that we hope, over the years, will evolve into a coherent and consistent political philosophy.
* On Saturdays, you may have noticed, this page usually has a unifying theme - say, three editorials on aspects of the weather, or France.
* "Thinking Out Loud" is an experiment in making up our minds in public. Starting with two national issues, immigration and traffic, that are especially important to us in Southern California, we will devote space in all of our precincts - editorials, Op-Eds, the Sunday Opinion section (and watch out for a redesign and name change there!) and our website - to exploring aspects and alternate views of these subjects. We don't have a solution, and there may not be a good one. But that is no excuse for failing to come up with the best one. We hope this process will help us do it.
* We will allow board members to dissent from editorials they disagree with - though only once a year each. Judy Dugan has already used up her 2005 allotment with a strong rebuttal to our editorials endorsing the Republican Senate leadership's efforts to kill the filibuster
* Watch next week for the introduction of "wikitorials" - an online feature that will empower you to rewrite Los Angeles Times editorials.
----------------------------------------------------
http://www.nytimes.com/2005/06/13/business/media/13lat.html?pagewanted=print
Then go to the above link to see an independent view of the proposed changes by the New York Times. The most interesting points were those taking a skeptical view of Editorial and Opinion Page Editor Michael Kinsley. See below:
"Some at the newspaper have found Mr. Kinsley distant and uncommunicative, saying that he rarely answers internal e-mail messages. They said that situation was not helped by the fact that Mr. Kinsley still primarily lives in Seattle and flies to Los Angeles every other week.
"I'm not known for being uncommunicative," Mr. Kinsley said. "I'm known for being overly communicative. The commuting is working out O.K.. It's not ideal but it's pretty great for me."
(well... as long as it works for... someone)
And...
"Mr. Kinsley is not unaccustomed to controversy. Earlier this year, he got into a bitter public fight with the feminist writer Susan Estrich, a former Harvard Law School classmate, when she tried to get him to run more opinion pieces by women.
Last week, the newspaper's entire editorial column was filled by an unsigned 1,400-word article arguing that malaria does not receive the attention or money it deserves. The article noted that Mr. Kinsley's wife, Patty Stonesifer is co-chairwoman and president of the Bill and Melinda Gates Foundation.
The foundation is overseeing an anti-malaria campaign, but some of the newspaper's staff thought the article's appearance was a conflict of interest. Mr. Martinez addressed the issue by saying "the idea that we can't bring more attention because the Gates foundation is trying to find a cure is a bit mind boggling."
Interesting, huh? Now as for what LA Cowboy thinks... I don't know. Obviously, the status quo is not working. All we can do is watch, wait - and hope.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment