The New York Times | Poynter
Arthur Brisbane tells the Times’ Christine Haughney that after leaving his post in September he plans to work on some writing and “enjoy life without quite so much friction”:
“It’s a pretty intense job and one of the things that became clear pretty quickly to me was the scope of the scrutiny that The Times is subjected to by all kinds of people,” Mr. Brisbane said. “You’re very often bringing forward issues that cause some discomfort inside the paper.”
Brisbane’s own work was criticized a few times, like when he asked if the Times should act as a “truth vigilante.” His question evoked guffaws and criticism, some of which he said was misdirected.
My colleague Craig Silverman writes that the Times’ four public editors all have been pretty similar: older, white men with decades of publishing experience. He lists five things the Times should look for in its next public editor, including experience working in digital and doing media criticism. He figures the media criticism suggestion will be controversial:
If the public editor job is valuable enough to hire, shouldn’t the paper seek out a person with at least some experience in this arena? I don’t believe a person is qualified to do this work just because they’ve had a long and successful career in journalism.
Related: Curating New York Times long-form a good idea, just not for the public editor
