Bob Herbert to Leave The Times

[Uzybone]

Source: NYTimes

Bob Herbert, a columnist for The New York Times Op-Ed page, is leaving the paper after nearly 20 years.

Mr. Herbert’s resignation was announced in a memo to Times staff members on Friday. His last column will appear in the paper on Saturday.

Mr. Herbert, who started his Times column in 1993, was known for his combative style, blunt language and progressive politics. In a message accompanying the announcement, Mr. Herbert, who is 66, said he was eager to move on to a new form of writing.

Read more: http://mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/25/bob-herbert-to-leave-the-times/

---

The liberal "purge" in th M$M is heating up. Olberman, Rich(who I never really respected), Herbert...I wonder who is next.

[bermudat]

1. Are there any other liberal columnists left at the NYTimes?

[shireen]

2. Krugman. nt

[No Elephants]

3. All the news that's fit to slant.

[Ken Burch]

4. Next thing, Murdoch will by the Gray Lady and that'll be the end of it for NYC journalism.

n/t.

[ChairmanAgnostic]

5. Andrew Breitbart agrees to replace him

That would be par for their recent course

[snot]

6. The purge has been going on for decades.

They're just clearing out the remnants.

[mackerel]

7. NYT all the news that's fit to spit.

[TomClash]

8. Only Krugman is left

I read NYT less and less.

[JDPriestly]

9. I dropped the LA Times subscription when they stopped printing

Robert Scheer's editorials and refused to apologize for the lies in their reporting on the Iraq War. They put their article about the Downing Street Memo somewhere post-first-page. I decided I did not share their priorities. Still don't. I do not believe in supporting media with which I strongly disagree.

I started following "current events" (Remember that one?) back during the Korean War when my father told us about how difficult it was for him as a pastor and a pacifist to visit the families of fallen soldiers.

I have heard enough from the right-wing fanatics. I know their Spiel. I do not want to waste my time listening to their fairy tales or reading their drivel.

The LA Times is, therefore, off my reading list.

[RZM]

10. I see no evidence here that Herbert was forced out

Not sure why you are calling this part of a 'purge.' Perhaps he was, but nothing indicates that right now.

[robcon]

11. Evidence? They don't need no stinkin' evidence.

They like the name 'purge' so they use it.

[scribble]

13. In the absence of evidence,

... it is as foolish for you to assume there is no purge, as it is for someone else to assume there is a purge.

This is a Libertarian hidey-hole. They love to deny the obvious, and then claim that the obvious couldn't be going on.

=-===

In the meantime, The NY Times misreported the 2000 Florida election results, supported Bush's Iraq war, never got rid of reporters on their staff who were also Bush Administration flunkies, hired several neoConservative reporters and columnists in spite of their clear absence of journalistic objectivity and skill, ignored the Wall Street calamity until they were forced to report it; and on and on. At some point, we all have reason to suspect that the NY Times is NOT an objective; never mind a Liberal, newspaper.

I'd say it's time for you to crawl out of your hidey-hole and take a look at their record.


sc

[RZM]

15. Did you read my response?

I said: 'perhaps he was ' . . . I did not indicate that I assumed no purge was going on. But now that you mention it, I generally don't assume a conspiracy when a simpler explanation is available - this seems like a good time to do that, because the simpler explanation came straight from Herbert himself. Those who assume that conspiracies are just as likely as more mundane explanations inevitably spend much of their time in fantasy-land.

[Skittles]

19. SCRIBBLE NAILS IT

this is worthy of its own thread - welcome to DU, scribble :hi:

[Doctor_J]

21. Well reasoned, scribble

welcome

[ellenrr]

12. I like Herbert a lot. Too intelligent and progressive for the Times.

I wonder what he will do next.

[DeSwiss]

14. The ironic part of all this is.....

...they have the audacity to put up a pay wall for the crap that's left (e.g. - asshat Ross Douthat and dimwitted Maureen Dowd) after their better and most talented writers have left the building. On second thought however, it's actually not a bad strategy if they don't want people to see how bad they suck.

- Until it's too late and they've already paid their money......

K&R

[splat]

16. Herbert and Rich were both behind the Time Select paywall

Another doomed plan to hide their journalism was the last straw. Not forced out, they left for better platforms.

[Doctor_J]

17. As soon a Krugman is forced out, Big Media will be 100% right-wing

Combine that with Hate Radio, and you have Stalin's dream come true.

[Skittles]

18. exactly what I thought when I read the subject line

:(

[EFerrari]

20. Gene Robinson. But he's getting lonier all the time. nt

[RUMMYisFROSTED]

22. Isn't Gene at the Post?

eta: never mind if you were just referring to "big media."

[EFerrari]

23. Yeah, he's a delight

If you haven't seen his BookTv segment filmed in Austin, go see it. Great with the audience, same as he is on Rachel or anywhere else. He'd be fun to work with. :)

http://www.c-spanvideo.org/program/Splin