NYT’s biz editor slams public editor’s column
Larry Ingrassia, the business editor of the New York Times, has distributed his response to public editor Arthur Brisbane‘s column Sunday about Dealbook in which he questioned how the business news desk was distributing its resources.
Jim Romenesko of Poynter has Ingrassia’s memo, which reads in part:
Your column left me wondering how closely you read the Times – or at least our financial coverage. There is far more financial news, of all kinds, than ever before. Not less, as your column strangely asks.
On the coverage of the European debt crisis: We have written several hundred stories explaining its origins and implications over the past year and a half, and dozens of them ran on the front page. A number of these stories delved into the very questions you wondered about – including the dangerous ripple effects in the financial system if the problems aren’t solved. And other stories have explained how derivatives sold by banks both helped disguise the extent of the debt problems in some countries like Greece, but also pose concerns going forward. Maybe you missed these, but we reported them.
On DealBook: The addition of reporters has enabled The Times to expand its coverage of finance, not just the stories that you cited about what’s happening on Wall Street but public service journalism stories as well – like the banking industry’s aggressive lobbying against some of the stricter regulations approved by Congress in the wake of the 2008 financial meltdown or the battle to limit the power of the new Consumer Financial Protection Bureau, to name just a couple of important running stories to which DealBook reporters have made major contributions.
Sorry, but when you start with a wrong premise and ignore the record, you end up with a wrong conclusion.
Read more here.