Comments on: What a 21st Century News Ombudsman Should Do: Aggregate, Curate, Debate

By: Kay

Kay — Wed, 22 Aug 2012 12:40:01 +0000

I agree with the other commenters that Arthur Brisbane at the Times is off the mark. He has an extremely annoying way of substituting his own judgment for everyone else’s on the planet. I dearly wish that the ombudsman would do what your post suggests – gather up the brickbats and accolades of others, etc. – without presuming to try to turn the New York Times into the Arthur Brisbane Blog.

By: Mark

Mark — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 07:49:41 +0000

Great ideas, especially this observation: “The best media criticism of every news organization is being done outside its walls… [yet they] bring media criticism inside the organization.”
I think that gets to the heart of it: there’s the ingrained reflex to internalize the critique. Hence the cry for such institutions to pick up the pace of innovation (as you say).

To be fair, I’ve communicated a few times with the NY Times ombudsmen (yes, men) and found them receptive, even going in though the front gate. But there’s always the institutional prerogative that makes the cheap seats feel, well, cheap.

For example, given the volume of commentary and criticism on his first post, it’s telling that Brisbane’s quotes “thoughtful responses” from only WaPo and CJR – just the kind of in-the-fraternity chatter that might disappoint those seeking a more open and inclusive conversation. It may not happen on the Times site, but you can feed your comments off-site here: http://truthvigilantes.tumblr.com/submit

By: Henry Edward Hardy

Henry Edward Hardy — Sun, 15 Jan 2012 06:37:44 +0000

It is not reasonable to think that all 300 readers who commented in the two hours before posting was cut off misunderstood the post. We understood perfectly well. Brisbane just didn’t like the response.

Your above points, while interesting, are NOT what an ombudsman does. The Ombudsman is an advocate for the readers. Period. Not a go-between, not an apologist for the paper. Not someone to “call bullshit” when he personally disagrees with the consensus of the readers. And certainly not someone who calls printing the truth being a “vigilante” and who belittles and insults anyone who disagrees with his obvious stupidity. Do not be friends with this guy. He is an ignoramus, to say the least.

By: Norman Oder

Norman Oder — Fri, 13 Jan 2012 03:53:17 +0000

Good idea. Alas, when I’ve approached the Times ombudsman w/a serious critique, I’ve gotten blown off… by his assistant.

See:
http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2011/08/journalism-of-verification-times-public.html
http://atlanticyardsreport.blogspot.com/2011/09/sports-business-journal-confirms.html