NY TIMES Blames Slow Coverage of ACORN on "Insufficient Tuned-In-Ness"

On September 26, 2009, Clark Hoyt, the Public Editor for the New York Times published a piece entitled Tuning In Too Late, in which the public editor attempts to explains the paper's failure to pick up and report on the ACORN controvesry that stated with the release of the first of several undercover videos by Mr. James O'Keefe and his partner, Hannah Giles.

Mr. Clark wrote that:

"It was an intriguing story: employees of a controversial outfit, long criticized by Republicans as corrupt, appearing to engage in outrageous, if not illegal, behavior. An Acorn worker in Baltimore was shown telling the “prostitute” that she could describe herself to tax authorities as an “independent artist” and claim 15-year-old prostitutes, supposedly illegal immigrants, as dependents.

But for days, as more videos were posted and government authorities rushed to distance themselves from Acorn, The Times stood still. Its slow reflexes — closely following its slow response to a controversy that forced the resignation of Van Jones, a White House adviser — suggested that it has trouble dealing with stories arising from the polemical world of talk radio, cable television and partisan blogs. Some stories, lacking facts, never catch fire. But others do, and a newspaper like The Times needs to be alert to them or wind up looking clueless or, worse, partisan itself.

Jill Abramson, the managing editor for news, agreed with me that the paper was “slow off the mark,” and blamed “insufficient tuned-in-ness to the issues that are dominating Fox News and talk radio.” She and Bill Keller, the executive editor, said last week that they would now assign an editor to monitor opinion media and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies."

"Insufficient Tuned-In-Ness"? 

What the hell is that -  another politically correct NY Times definition to explain the Old Gray Lady's complete lack of journalistic integrity and ethics?

And now the NY Times has assigned  "...an editor to monitor opinion media and brief them frequently on bubbling controversies."    What does that mean, having somebody sitting in front of a television watching the Fox News Channel and monitoring the Drudge Report on their computer?

At first glance, Mr. Clark's piece appears to be a sincere mea-culpa for the paper's obvious failures to provide coverage of those stories which may reflect badly on their liberal progressive friends, but it will take much more than some printed words in a column by the paper's public editor and a promise to start watching and reading other news sites to save this lethargic aging elephant which is quickly stumbling towards the tar pits of irrelevancy.

Peter J. Mahon