Braking Kristol: 'NYT' Public Editor Hits Hiring of Columnis

Braking Kristol: 'NYT' Public Editor Hits Hiring of Columnist
By E&P Staff
Published: January 13, 2008

In a message that probably is not going down well in The New York Times' front office, the paper's public editor, Clark Hoyt, has called the controversial hiring of William Kristol as an op-ed columnist a "mistake."

He also wrote, in his column today, that of nearly 700 messages he has received about the selection, only one praised the pick. Public Arthur Sulzberger, he revealed, "was surprised by the vehemence of the reaction."

Kristol made a bad mistake in his very first column this week, attributing a quote by Michael Medved to Michelle Malkin. And he has been criticized by liberals for his arch-cosnervative views and ardent support for the war in Iraq. But Hoyt writes: "That is not why I think Sulzberger and Rosenthal made a mistake, and I agree with their effort to address an Op-Ed lineup that, until Kristol came aboard, was at least six liberals against one conservative who isn't always all that conservative."

What bugs Hoyt, however, is remarks such as the one Kristol made on Fox News Sunday on June 25, 2006, when he said, "I think the attorney general has an absolute obligation to consider prosecution" of The New York Times for publishing an article that revealed a classified government program to sift the international banking transactions of thousands of Americans in a search for terrorists.

"Publication of the article was controversial ?- my predecessor as public editor first supported it and then changed his mind ?- but Kristol's leap to prosecution smacked of intimidation and disregard for both the First Amendment and the role of a free press in monitoring a government that has a long history of throwing the cloak of national security and classification over its activities. This is not a person I would have rewarded with a regular spot in front of arguably the most elite audience in the nation.

"Kristol refused to talk with me about this issue, or an earlier statement that The Times was 'irredeemable,' or the reaction to his appointment ?- an odd stance for someone who presumably will want others to talk to him for his column.

"[Editorial Page Editor Andrew] Rosenthal said Kristol's comment about prosecution bothered him. It was, Rosenthal said, 'a heavy accusation that put him in a category other than a journalist.' But he said that Op-Ed columnists are not necessarily traditional journalists, and he did not think that 'holding one opinion' should be the basis for selecting or rejecting a columnist."

Hoyt concludes the column: "This is a decision I would not have made. But it is not the end of the world. Everyone should take a deep breath and calm down.... If Kristol is another [William] Safire, he has the chance to prove it. If not, he and the newspaper will move on, and the search will resume."