The Times Kills Its Environmental Blog To Focus on Horse Racing and Awards Shows

[wtmusic]

"In January, the New York Times dismantled its environmental desk but promised that its coverage wouldn’t suffer. “We can tell the story just as well without the infrastructure,” managing editor Dean Baquet told the paper’s public editor, Margaret Sullivan. Reaction to the news was generally disconsolate, but Bora Zivkovic at Scientific American offered an optimistic spin, reasoning that the paper could distribute environmental reporting across other editorial teams so long as it retained its “Green” blog as a hub for readers passionate about such issues. Zivkovic’s post was headlined, “Why the NYTimes ‘Green Blog’ Is Now Essential.”

Essential or not, the “Green” blog is now dead as well. The paper’s editors announced the decision in a single-paragraph post that went live at 5 p.m. on Friday, the ideal time to publish a piece of news that you don't want to have to answer for. Columbia Journalism Review’s Curtis Brainard called the Times for comment shortly after 5 p.m. and was told that executive editor Jill Abramson, managing editor Dean Baquet, and corporate spokeswoman Eileen Murphy had all gone home for the day. The paper’s environmental editors didn’t answer their phones either.

Brainard obtained an email from Nancy Kenney, the deputy editor responsible for the blog, which indicated that the announcement came as a surprise to the staff as well. “Masthead editors at The Times informed me around noon today that they plan to discontinue the Green blog and devote resources elsewhere,” she wrote."

http://www.slate.com/blogs/future_tense/2013/03/04/ny_times_kills_its_environmental_blog_green_to_devote_resources_elsewhere.html

[hatrack]

1. Same old shit

Kind of like the time our local paper and its cleaver-wielding new publisher went on and on and on about how having fewer reporters and editors, cutting whole sections and columns would actually make it a better newspaper!

Oh, and fuck the New York Times. Greedy, stupid fucking bean-counters.

On edit: From CJR:

EDIT

This is terrible news, to say the least. When the Times announced in January that it was dismantling its three-year-old environment pod and reassigning its editors and reporters to other desks, managing editor Dean Baquet insisted that the outlet remained as committed as ever to covering the environment. Obviously, that was an outright lie.

The Green blog was a crucial platform for stories that didn’t fit into the print edition’s already shrunken news hole—which is a lot on the energy and environment beat—and it was a place where reporters could add valuable to context and information to pieces that did make the paper. An addendum to the discontinuation announcement encouraged readers, “Please watch for environmental policy news on the Caucus blog and energy technology news on the Bits blog,” but without the Green blog, there’s no way that these topics are going to get as much attention as they once did.

In an act of total cowardice, the Times clearly timed its announcement to avoid (for the weekend, at least) having to deal with what is sure to be widespread criticism. When I called the paper shortly after 5pm on Friday, I was informed that executive editor Jill Abramson, managing editor Dean Baquet, and corporate spokeswoman Eileen Murphy were all out of the office for the day.

Sandy Keenan, the former editor of the environment pod, and Nancy Kenney, the deputy editor who was responsible for the Green blog, didn’t answer their phones, either, but I can hardly blame them. An email that Kenney sent to colleagues at 5:02pm on Friday suggests that that the decision to ax the blog was made from up on high and came as a surprise.

EDIT

http://www.cjr.org/the_observatory/new_york_times_cancels_green_e.php

[wtmusic]

2. Kudos to CJR for calling them out. nt

[cprise]

3. But with friends like this...

I recall reading several years ago about an internal poll of NYT environment editors that showed they largely didn't believe AGW was happening.

The article was probably posted here as well.

[Nihil]

4. They know what their readers want ...

Trivial meaningless shit that doesn't disturb their "beautiful minds" or make any
attempt at pointing out the folly of continuing with their existing destructive habits.