By Christopher B. Daly
In her latest column, NYTimes public editor Margaret Sullivan expressed a certain angst over the newspaper’s practice of accepting ads for high-end products. To me, this is a puzzling kind of problem for her to have. Who does she think pays her salary? And the salary of everyone else in the Times newsroom?
Every time I see a full-page ad from Bergdorfs or a big spread of ads for uber-pricey chronographs in that silly “T” magazine, I think, “Great. I don’t need this stuff, but I am so grateful to those luxury brands for buying space in the Times. Buy more!”
Yes, of course, the paper’s editors need to make sure that they and the reporters don’t suck up to the likes of Hennessy and Vuitton. But I’d much rather see the Times wrestling with the temptations of having too much money than dealing with the consequences of not having enough.
I’ve been broke myself, and it ain’t great.
Prof Chris Daly's Blog 
Absolutely right. The more Tiffany is willing to subsidize expensive investigative reporting, the less ordinary subscribers have to. Sullivan has turned the Public Editor position into a left-leaning call and response between a preacher and her choir, which may be good for her brand, but leaves moderate and conservative readers without a Public Editor interested in their concerns.
LikeLike