NY Times Editor: Critics 'weird'

William Tate
Was New York Times editor Bill Keller referring to my American Thinker column when he called critics of his personal involvement in Iranian election coverage, "weird?"

In an email to Editor and Publisher Keller complained that he's received "a few bizarre vibes from people outside the NYT who are puzzled by my presence in Tehran.
As one of those critics -- and the first to my knowledge to point out the agenda behind it -- I consider it quite a compliment that Keller, a card-carrying member of the media elite and insulated in an environment bluer than B.B. King, would call me weird. 

Keller asks in his email to E&P if "editors are supposed to be desk jockeys who never go get a sense of the story," and "when a big, exhausting news breaks visiting editors should hole up in the hotel and let the reporters do all the work?"

The answers: No, and No.

But if those are the criteria for Keller's personal involvement in this story, then where was he during the Tea Party rallies that broke out all across this country on April 15th? Now that North Korea is threatening to fire off a missile toward Hawaii, will Keller hop on the next plane for Pyongyang?

Besides, my criticism of Keller's involvement in coverage wasn't about the nuts and bolts of reporters' and editors' respective roles. The Times', and MSM's, coverage has far less to do with Iranian politics than with promulgating their far-left agenda here at home.

Despite his protestations to the contrary, Keller's personal involvement in Iranian election coverage bespeaks far more than an editor's understandable desire to be where the story's breaking. As I pointed out in my Tuesday AT column,  "Keller's personal involvement committed what little is left of the Times' once-proud reputation to the election -- more specifically, to reporting a supposed 'Obama effect,' which they claim influenced recent Lebanese parliamentary elections and which they predicted would help determine the Iranian presidential election.

With even the Times' own poll numbers showing Obama tanking on his handling of key domestic issues such as the federal deficit, the planned closing of Gitmo, and Obama's current raison d'etre, health care, it is vital to the O-Team that they shift attention to foreign policy, where his support remains reasonably strong, even if it requires some slight of hand.

Voila! The Obama effect.

William Tate is an award-winning journalist and author, and wouldn't particularly resent being called "weird" by the editor of the New York Times
Was New York Times editor Bill Keller referring to my American Thinker column when he called critics of his personal involvement in Iranian election coverage, "weird?"

In an email to Editor and Publisher Keller complained that he's received "a few bizarre vibes from people outside the NYT who are puzzled by my presence in Tehran.
As one of those critics -- and the first to my knowledge to point out the agenda behind it -- I consider it quite a compliment that Keller, a card-carrying member of the media elite and insulated in an environment bluer than B.B. King, would call me weird. 

Keller asks in his email to E&P if "editors are supposed to be desk jockeys who never go get a sense of the story," and "when a big, exhausting news breaks visiting editors should hole up in the hotel and let the reporters do all the work?"

The answers: No, and No.

But if those are the criteria for Keller's personal involvement in this story, then where was he during the Tea Party rallies that broke out all across this country on April 15th? Now that North Korea is threatening to fire off a missile toward Hawaii, will Keller hop on the next plane for Pyongyang?

Besides, my criticism of Keller's involvement in coverage wasn't about the nuts and bolts of reporters' and editors' respective roles. The Times', and MSM's, coverage has far less to do with Iranian politics than with promulgating their far-left agenda here at home.

Despite his protestations to the contrary, Keller's personal involvement in Iranian election coverage bespeaks far more than an editor's understandable desire to be where the story's breaking. As I pointed out in my Tuesday AT column,  "Keller's personal involvement committed what little is left of the Times' once-proud reputation to the election -- more specifically, to reporting a supposed 'Obama effect,' which they claim influenced recent Lebanese parliamentary elections and which they predicted would help determine the Iranian presidential election.

With even the Times' own poll numbers showing Obama tanking on his handling of key domestic issues such as the federal deficit, the planned closing of Gitmo, and Obama's current raison d'etre, health care, it is vital to the O-Team that they shift attention to foreign policy, where his support remains reasonably strong, even if it requires some slight of hand.

Voila! The Obama effect.

William Tate is an award-winning journalist and author, and wouldn't particularly resent being called "weird" by the editor of the New York Times