Huh?
I'm not the editor of a major metropolitan newspaper, but it does occur to me to wonder why, with all the breaking stories in the world today, the New York Times found room on its front page for a story about the state of the Clinton's marriage.
I'm wondering why an editor assigned a reporter to the story, since said reporter claims to have interviewed dozens and dozens of people. (Apparently the telco/NSA story has been fully detailed, the possibility of war with Iran is over, and the Gulf Coast is all back together, leaving him plenty of time.) The shocking revelation of this hard-digging investigative reporting appears to be that the Clinton's don't spend every waking moment together, what with one having a career being a leading Senator and the other an ex-President. Stunning.
Now, I realize that Senator Clinton does represent the State of New York, and there is speculation that she will run for her husband's old job in the future, but seriously, what promotes an article on her marriage out of the Style section, assuming it belongs in the Times and not US Weekly in the first place? Should we expect a similar article on say, Senator McCain's marriage? Jeb Bush's? Has the Times assigned a reporter to cover the "busy two-career couple" beat, because news of how many nights a month a particular couple gets to spend together is of vital importance to our nation and world? How long has George W. Bush been President?
Today's story is a nostalgic reminder of the days of Kenneth Starr. Though it's quite bizarre, since we're into the middle of the second term of the Big Dog's replacement. If the Times wanted to exercise its "writing about officials under investigation" muscles, why isn't this article about how much time Scooter Libby and Tom DeLay spend with their wives?
What business is it of mine what the friends of the Clintons say about them? Why is the Times asking them? We had more than enough of that before the Bushistas drove the country hard into the ditch. In 2006, there really are better things for the Times to be writing about.
I'm wondering why an editor assigned a reporter to the story, since said reporter claims to have interviewed dozens and dozens of people. (Apparently the telco/NSA story has been fully detailed, the possibility of war with Iran is over, and the Gulf Coast is all back together, leaving him plenty of time.) The shocking revelation of this hard-digging investigative reporting appears to be that the Clinton's don't spend every waking moment together, what with one having a career being a leading Senator and the other an ex-President. Stunning.
Now, I realize that Senator Clinton does represent the State of New York, and there is speculation that she will run for her husband's old job in the future, but seriously, what promotes an article on her marriage out of the Style section, assuming it belongs in the Times and not US Weekly in the first place? Should we expect a similar article on say, Senator McCain's marriage? Jeb Bush's? Has the Times assigned a reporter to cover the "busy two-career couple" beat, because news of how many nights a month a particular couple gets to spend together is of vital importance to our nation and world? How long has George W. Bush been President?
Today's story is a nostalgic reminder of the days of Kenneth Starr. Though it's quite bizarre, since we're into the middle of the second term of the Big Dog's replacement. If the Times wanted to exercise its "writing about officials under investigation" muscles, why isn't this article about how much time Scooter Libby and Tom DeLay spend with their wives?
What business is it of mine what the friends of the Clintons say about them? Why is the Times asking them? We had more than enough of that before the Bushistas drove the country hard into the ditch. In 2006, there really are better things for the Times to be writing about.
posted by Paul at 8:02 AM |
|
email this
