In what can only be interpreted as another blow to media balance & fairness, the New York Times has refused to guarantee that another conservative would replace fired columnist Bill Kristol.
On Monday, it was announced that Kristol's gig with the New York Times had come to an abrupt end. My colleague, Noel Sheppard, quoting a report in the Daily Beast, noted the conflicting and contradictory reports about the supposed reason for Kristol's firing. He quoted one source as saying “His conservative ideas were cutting edge and influential,” I was told. “But his sloppy writing and failure to fact check what he wrote made us queasy.”
But, as Noel also pointed out in his column, the Times sure doesn't seem to have a problem with the sloppy writing and fact checking of other columnists, like Paul Krugman.
Whatever the pretext, Kristol is now out as conservative voice at the Times and speculation has begun regarding his replacement. Mark Krikorian at NRO runs through the potential list:
Frum's top pick is Heather Mac Donald, Harvey Mansfield suggests our own Victor Hanson or Jonah, Grover Norquist suggests Fred Barnes, Rod Dreher suggests Ross Douthat, Patrick Ruffini suggests Rush Limbaugh, Ben Smith from Politico suggests Seth Lipsky, and, to bring it full circle, George Packer suggests Frum.
There are no guarantees, however, that Kristol's spot will be filled by another conservative. David Brooks notwithstanding, the NYT's stable of regular columnists is filled with liberals of all sorts. One would think that, as Krikorian pointed out above, it would make the most sense to replace Kristol with another leading conservative pundit.
It goes without saying that "making sense" and providing balance are not the hallmarks of the Times.
The most distressing name being bandied about, for those few remaining conservative readers of the NYT, was suggested by NRO's media blogger, Greg Pollowitz, who also reported on the firing of Bill Kristol.
From the New York Times reporting on itself:
“It was mutual agreement,” Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor, said in an interview. “We discussed this before the election, and decided that we would end now.”
As for whether The Times would find another conservative voice for its Op-Ed page, Mr. Rosenthal said: “Sadly, I can’t answer that question, except to say stay tuned. We have some interesting plans.”
Any bets? I'll put $10 in the office pool on Olbermann.
Pollowitz's suggestion that Olbermann could be Kristol's replacement comes on the heels of news that MSNBC will be replacing Olbermann's 10pm replay hour with a new personality. Some readers noted in the comments of that post, that one hour a night was probably not sufficiently capacious for Olbermann's infamous ego.
My guess is that the ego spillover from his nightly show would be more than enough to fill the column space allotted to him by the NYT.
All joking aside, it's unlikely the NYT would choose a lowly TV personality to pen a once-a-week column for the newspaper of record.
—Jacob S. Lybbert is an editorial associate at NewsBusters.



















Editor at Large
Comments Policy
I'm still laughing at the
January 29, 2009 - 15:50 ET by bigtimerI'm still laughing at the thought of El Rushbo being hired.
Let alone him taking it...although it would be delicious.
Anyway...that would happen about the 12th of Never.
I could give a rats rear what the NYTs does.
I just would like to see their demise.
Now that would be a weeks worth of celebration!
So? Who cares?
January 29, 2009 - 15:51 ET by Jarhead68Honestly, do any of you care if The Slimes replaces Kristol with a "conservative"? Their idea of a conservative is David Brooks. The Slimes will not be a viable news source until Punchdrunk Salzberger goes elsewhere and REAL journalists like Michael Yon take over the paper.
NYT: “But his sloppy
January 29, 2009 - 15:51 ET by Chris NormanNYT: “But his sloppy writing and failure to fact check what he wrote made us queasy"
Funny, it's the rest of what's in the Times that makes us queasy...
The "Mainstream" Media: By liberals. For liberals.
What, no Times token?
January 29, 2009 - 15:56 ET by CTYou missed the sign by the door "No Conscientious Conservative Writers Need Apply".
Kristol is the better man
January 29, 2009 - 15:57 ET by jdubyaThe fact that the NYT has a failing revenue stream and projections are bleak and they are cutting staff, would anyone be stupid enough to take a job there? I guess I should be more focused and say anyone conservative? Any of the left loons would spring to it because it would be great resume fodder to waft in front of some grocer when they are applying for a bagger position.
I am sure NYT knows very well that any conservative pundit taking that job will ask for quite a bit up front in their contract. NYT has nothing to stand on and that is why they will not look to the right for a replacement. They are failures and probably have about 6-9 months left, unless Pelosi, Reid, and Barry inject some juice into their kitty. Of course they will burn that like a bunch of flighty investment advisors at a day spa in Phoenix. Wait, that did happen! crap...
There are Conservatives that read the NYT?
January 29, 2009 - 16:07 ET by thebutlerdiditAnd more disturbing, people actually think there's a real Conservative that write for the Times?
Bringing the government in to run Wall Street is like saying, "Dad burned the dinner, let's get the dog to cook." PJ O'Rourke
There are Conservatives that read the NYT?
January 29, 2009 - 16:07 ET by thebutlerdiditAnd more disturbing, people actually think there's a real Conservative that write for the Times?
Bringing the government in to run Wall Street is like saying, "Dad burned the dinner, let's get the dog to cook." PJ O'Rourke
Sounds like
January 29, 2009 - 16:02 ET by ahussersome "Blacklisting" going on.
Change: When the winds of change blow hard enough, the most trivial of things can become deadly projectiles. From a Poster
Raise your hand if you give
January 29, 2009 - 16:30 ET by SickofLibsRaise your hand if you give a crap.
I thought so.
more liberals
January 29, 2009 - 16:35 ET by m1xramThey need more liberals at the NYT, not conservatives. It will help them go under faster so they can get bailed out quicker. The most important thing during these tough times is to succeed at failing.
If all else fails the NYT could solicit donations from their friends overseas. You know, the guys who like to get national security information.
Crystal was a conservative?
January 29, 2009 - 16:41 ET by notonmywatchCrystal was a conservative?
No, he and his daddy
January 29, 2009 - 17:43 ET by LajawNo, he and his daddy are/were neo-cons.
As if any conservatives actually read that trashbin liner...
January 29, 2009 - 16:56 ET by bpjamLet them put Pat Buchanan in there. That will teach them. Let them pretend to have Pat on their side for a while and they'll be dying to give him back to 'the right'.
Replacing Kristol
January 29, 2009 - 17:59 ET by aronscottThe smartest thing The Times could do is to steal a respected conservative mind away from an intra-Gotham competitor. I'm thinking either the Post's Ralph Peters or the Journal's Bret Stephens.