Return to Transcripts main page

CNN Live Today

Analysis of 'New York Times' Resignations

Aired June 05, 2003 - 11:05   ET

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.

THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.


LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Joining us now from New York is our Jeff Greenfield and we're trying, as we said, we were trying to get as much comment on this and as much information on exactly what is happening there as we possibly can.
Jeff Greenfield, we're glad to be able to grab him in our New York studios there. Jeff, what do you know about all of this?

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: As it happens, Leon, last night at one of those endless cocktail party -- book party things that dominates Manhattan in journalistic circles, I ran into one of the member of "The New York Times" editorial board whose account of what Howell Raines has been going through this last month makes the public coverage of it almost look tame, that the anger within "The New York Times" on everyone from secretaries up to and including assistant managing editors at what has happened has been almost ferocious.

The sense that "The Times," which is the paper of record, the place that everybody often cites as accurate, a paper that has been dominant in journalistic circles for the better part of a century has suffered a major blow and this is a combination of what Jayson Blair did, the response to it which in the view of some people at "The Time" was inadequate, and then to be blunt, the leadership style of Howell Raines which is pretty tough.

I mean editors traditionally are tough but the truth of the matter is that Howell Raines, whether fairly or not, did not have a lot of support within the newsroom, and the Jayson Blair incident, the resignation of Rick Bragg a featured reporter on "The Times" who used stringers' material without perhaps giving enough credit, these stories began to undermine and continue to undermine Howell Raines' position within the newsroom.

And, if this account by this one person is correct, every effort to staunch this, every effort to kind of shore up "The Times" and say let's get on with it, just was met with failure because of this combination of events.

HARRIS: Was it the wake, though, of the Jayson Blair, basically - I don't want to use the word cover-up, but basically the way he managed the newspaper and the staffing after that broke, is that the biggest part of this issue here?

GREENFIELD: Well, and I think to be fair to Howell, once the Jayson Blair story broke, you had a number of forces that were not friendly to Howell Raines, that were able to use this episode to say see, this is the wrong guy. I mean let's just break it down quickly. Some of it is political. Conservatives, in particular, have argued that since Howell Raines became executive editor, that's the top slot at "The Times," the paper has been making its front page more overtly reflective of its liberal editorial page and they cite what they consider the excessive coverage of the attempt to make the Master's open to women so you had that force.

But more important than that, I think, there was a sense, a whole lot of important "New York Times" people have left the paper since Howell Raines became executive editor, and that has been attributed among his adversaries to the fact that he "plays favorites."

Sometimes reporters are regarded as stars, others are given short (unintelligible) so you had that. And then you had the sense that the basic coin of the realm for "The New York Times" is this is the paper you can trust and I think part of this frankly, Leon, was the barrage of jokes in all the late night comics.

David Letterman has been beating up on "The New York Times" almost since this happened. Political cartoonists, you know, all these kind of humorists say oh, you read it in "The New York Times" then they must have made it up.

For a paper like "The New York Times" in particular, that is about as devastating an atmosphere, as devastating a comment as you can get, not just to be criticized but to be laughed at. I think you add all that together and I think it became for Howell Raines simply an impossible situation.

HARRIS: Did you hear anything at all about Gerald Boyd? As I remember, isn't he the one who was put, credited as being Jayson Blair's mentor there at the newspaper? Is that the reason he's resigning as well?

GREENFIELD: Gerald Boyd was the number two. He was the managing editor and there was some talk, and this is above my pay grade, as to whether or not Gerald Boyd was the person who helped Jayson Blair ascend but the fact of the matter is that in a way this is like if a CEO resigns, his top aide often resigns in a company.

Howell Raines picked Gerald Boyd as his number two, and if they're going to have a new executive editor, it's kind of inevitable almost that that executive editor gets to pick his deputy.

But I think, Leon, you know it's easy for us journalists because we tend to be as self-absorbed, God knows, as anybody, to look at a controversy in a newspaper as being somehow more significant than other institutions.

But in this case, beyond the inside baseball stuff, it is the position of "The New York Times" as the most prestigious newspaper in the United States, the paper that people feel is the bedrock.

This is the place where you go for information, and the fact that so many errors and fabrications and acts of plagiarism happened because of this one reporter, I think was the, if I can make a grim analogy, this is the equivalent of a little rip opening up in the wing of the space shuttle.

HARRIS: Yes.

GREENFIELD: That took the whole thing down because it just puts into doubt so many other aspects of "The Times" and its leadership that I think at some point Howell Raines just felt I can not stay in this position and protect the paper.

HARRIS: That's a grim analogy but it actually works. That's exactly the way this thing sort of broke out, one little crack and then all of a sudden the whole thing kind of fell apart on them.

Real quickly, Jeff, is this exactly the kind of dramatic move that "The Times" actually needs right now? Is this the kind of thing that can actually save its reputation?

GREENFIELD: Well, you know, I think if you ask does "The New York Times" need one of perhaps the most embarrassing moment in its history, probably not, but to the extent that "The Times" can now say all right, we are doing what we've asked of other institutions that when something goes wrong.

Their editorials for years aimed at government and corporations have asked for accountability from the top, and short of the publisher, you know, Arthur Sulzberger, the family heir to this paper leaving, which is impossible to contemplate I think, this is about the most dramatic step the paper can get to say all right we're, you know, we're regrouping. We're going to be what we claim to be.

HARRIS: Jeff Greenfield, thank you very much. Thanks much for the insight and as always excellent.

GREENFIELD: OK.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com






Aired June 5, 2003 - 11:05   ET
THIS IS A RUSH TRANSCRIPT. THIS COPY MAY NOT BE IN ITS FINAL FORM AND MAY BE UPDATED.
LEON HARRIS, CNN ANCHOR: Joining us now from New York is our Jeff Greenfield and we're trying, as we said, we were trying to get as much comment on this and as much information on exactly what is happening there as we possibly can.
Jeff Greenfield, we're glad to be able to grab him in our New York studios there. Jeff, what do you know about all of this?

JEFF GREENFIELD, CNN SR. POLITICAL ANALYST: As it happens, Leon, last night at one of those endless cocktail party -- book party things that dominates Manhattan in journalistic circles, I ran into one of the member of "The New York Times" editorial board whose account of what Howell Raines has been going through this last month makes the public coverage of it almost look tame, that the anger within "The New York Times" on everyone from secretaries up to and including assistant managing editors at what has happened has been almost ferocious.

The sense that "The Times," which is the paper of record, the place that everybody often cites as accurate, a paper that has been dominant in journalistic circles for the better part of a century has suffered a major blow and this is a combination of what Jayson Blair did, the response to it which in the view of some people at "The Time" was inadequate, and then to be blunt, the leadership style of Howell Raines which is pretty tough.

I mean editors traditionally are tough but the truth of the matter is that Howell Raines, whether fairly or not, did not have a lot of support within the newsroom, and the Jayson Blair incident, the resignation of Rick Bragg a featured reporter on "The Times" who used stringers' material without perhaps giving enough credit, these stories began to undermine and continue to undermine Howell Raines' position within the newsroom.

And, if this account by this one person is correct, every effort to staunch this, every effort to kind of shore up "The Times" and say let's get on with it, just was met with failure because of this combination of events.

HARRIS: Was it the wake, though, of the Jayson Blair, basically - I don't want to use the word cover-up, but basically the way he managed the newspaper and the staffing after that broke, is that the biggest part of this issue here?

GREENFIELD: Well, and I think to be fair to Howell, once the Jayson Blair story broke, you had a number of forces that were not friendly to Howell Raines, that were able to use this episode to say see, this is the wrong guy. I mean let's just break it down quickly. Some of it is political. Conservatives, in particular, have argued that since Howell Raines became executive editor, that's the top slot at "The Times," the paper has been making its front page more overtly reflective of its liberal editorial page and they cite what they consider the excessive coverage of the attempt to make the Master's open to women so you had that force.

But more important than that, I think, there was a sense, a whole lot of important "New York Times" people have left the paper since Howell Raines became executive editor, and that has been attributed among his adversaries to the fact that he "plays favorites."

Sometimes reporters are regarded as stars, others are given short (unintelligible) so you had that. And then you had the sense that the basic coin of the realm for "The New York Times" is this is the paper you can trust and I think part of this frankly, Leon, was the barrage of jokes in all the late night comics.

David Letterman has been beating up on "The New York Times" almost since this happened. Political cartoonists, you know, all these kind of humorists say oh, you read it in "The New York Times" then they must have made it up.

For a paper like "The New York Times" in particular, that is about as devastating an atmosphere, as devastating a comment as you can get, not just to be criticized but to be laughed at. I think you add all that together and I think it became for Howell Raines simply an impossible situation.

HARRIS: Did you hear anything at all about Gerald Boyd? As I remember, isn't he the one who was put, credited as being Jayson Blair's mentor there at the newspaper? Is that the reason he's resigning as well?

GREENFIELD: Gerald Boyd was the number two. He was the managing editor and there was some talk, and this is above my pay grade, as to whether or not Gerald Boyd was the person who helped Jayson Blair ascend but the fact of the matter is that in a way this is like if a CEO resigns, his top aide often resigns in a company.

Howell Raines picked Gerald Boyd as his number two, and if they're going to have a new executive editor, it's kind of inevitable almost that that executive editor gets to pick his deputy.

But I think, Leon, you know it's easy for us journalists because we tend to be as self-absorbed, God knows, as anybody, to look at a controversy in a newspaper as being somehow more significant than other institutions.

But in this case, beyond the inside baseball stuff, it is the position of "The New York Times" as the most prestigious newspaper in the United States, the paper that people feel is the bedrock.

This is the place where you go for information, and the fact that so many errors and fabrications and acts of plagiarism happened because of this one reporter, I think was the, if I can make a grim analogy, this is the equivalent of a little rip opening up in the wing of the space shuttle.

HARRIS: Yes.

GREENFIELD: That took the whole thing down because it just puts into doubt so many other aspects of "The Times" and its leadership that I think at some point Howell Raines just felt I can not stay in this position and protect the paper.

HARRIS: That's a grim analogy but it actually works. That's exactly the way this thing sort of broke out, one little crack and then all of a sudden the whole thing kind of fell apart on them.

Real quickly, Jeff, is this exactly the kind of dramatic move that "The Times" actually needs right now? Is this the kind of thing that can actually save its reputation?

GREENFIELD: Well, you know, I think if you ask does "The New York Times" need one of perhaps the most embarrassing moment in its history, probably not, but to the extent that "The Times" can now say all right, we are doing what we've asked of other institutions that when something goes wrong.

Their editorials for years aimed at government and corporations have asked for accountability from the top, and short of the publisher, you know, Arthur Sulzberger, the family heir to this paper leaving, which is impossible to contemplate I think, this is about the most dramatic step the paper can get to say all right we're, you know, we're regrouping. We're going to be what we claim to be.

HARRIS: Jeff Greenfield, thank you very much. Thanks much for the insight and as always excellent.

GREENFIELD: OK.

TO ORDER A VIDEO OF THIS TRANSCRIPT, PLEASE CALL 800-CNN-NEWS OR USE OUR SECURE ONLINE ORDER FORM LOCATED AT www.fdch.com