NYT Obliterates Lolo Jones

I would concede that point, Boom, don't read that particular column very much. Can only speak about this particular instance.

Lc,

Not saying we should be unwilling to face "continual re-examination" of what we do. If I get a legitimate critique of my work (and there have been several good ones), I'm willing to listen. We can't get to our best without constant analysis of our own strengths and weaknesses.

I just feel very strongly that this is an unfair condemnation of Longman. There is nothing, absolutely nothing journalistically wrong with his article. No one is questioning anything except the tone of his piece. My question is: Is that fair? I don't believe it is. This is a guy who has covered that beat for years. As far as I know (and someone can correct me) his work is excellent, untainted by anything major.

He writes a column that turns out to be completely validated by the public commentary of Wells and Harper, yet is shredded by his own public editor. The next time the Koch brothers are pissed off at what The New York Times says about them, is the public editor going to say, "You know what, the tone of that one bothered me, too?"

Shoeless, Longman is probably more suited to write that piece than any Times columnist. Harper is quoted (Wells is not) and Jones was approached (but declined). Don't know if you saw the NBC interview, but it turned out his piece was bang-on.

 

Boom,

Here are Wells and Harper with NBC's Michelle Beadle after winning their medals:

http://www.nbcolympics.com/video/track-and-field/dawn-harper-and-kellie-wells-sit-down-with-michelle-beadle.html

 

I'm sorry, where are you going here?

 

How so?

 

No, I feel the same way about the column. Just don't like the public editor's piece.

Weak sauce.