In a half -hearted mea culpa editorial "Betraying Its Own Best Interests" New York Times Public Editor Clark Hoyt tries to explain away the Petraeus Ad brouhaha with a corporate standby expected of a lesser organization --- they're blaming it on the sales rep.
Now there are really two issues that Clark had to deal with in his editorial. The first was explaining how the ad was accepted in the first place---The New York Times has an advertising policy that it does not accept opinion advertisements that are attacks of a personal nature.
The advertising editor says he accepted the ad because of the question mark. Okay, fine.
But, to explain how the organization got a discounted "Standby" ad rate, for an ad that Moveon.org called in as a "rush" ad, this is the paper's explanation:
The Times had maintained for a week that the standby rate was appropriate, but a company spokeswoman told me late Thursday afternoon that an advertising sales representative made a mistake.[...] Catherine Mathis, vice president of corporate communications for The Times, said, “We made a mistake.” She said the advertising representative failed to make it clear that for that rate The Times could not guarantee the Monday placement but left MoveOn.org with the understanding that the ad would run then. She added, “That was contrary to our policies.”
Say it isn't so, New York Times! How could the venerable gray lady of the 5th estate stoop so low.
It was bad enough when you had the Jayson Blair and Judith Miller scandals, but now you are blaming a senior level decision on "A SALES REP?"
Mr. Hoyt,that statement doesn't pass the smell test. It does not pass the test of public scrutiny.
Good Grief! Do you really think the general public is living in a turnip patch?
Moveon.org is paying the balance due..that's about $80,000 more than they originally played.
The NYT is refusing to name the "so-called" Sales Rep.
If the tables were turned and the newspaper was trying to get to the bottom of a similar scandal at a regular business would they leave it at that? I don't think so. They wouldn't let up until the "Sales Rep" was exposed, humiliated and his/her career destroyed.
It's easy to be a truth-seeker when the spotlight isn't on you.
My StumbleUpon Page
