Previous | Next
34353637383940414243444546474849505152535455 of 512
Well, I suppose that I felt there was-it's hard for me to remember, honestly, why.
I think really the reason probably was that I felt there was quite a challenge in the “Review
of the Week,” and I wanted to be sure that I was not running away from that challenge. I
guess that was part of it. I was having quite an active and exciting time with it, and I think
I just felt there was still enough of a challenge there so I didn't want to quit it at that point.
That's the best of my recollection.
But a few months later, I thought that this editorial job, which after all was what I had
started doing at college and which I always had a certain inclination for, just did sound too
good an opportunity not to accept. This was a few months later, I don't remember exactly;
it wasn't much later that I decided to do it. I think that's about the best explanation that I
Could you tell me a little bit about how the Editorial Board of the Times operates?
The Editorial Board of the Times: now we're on what I've been doing ever since.
The Editorial Board of the Times operated when I came to it (and continued that way until
I took on new responsibilities myself) pretty much this way-and I might add that the
difference in actual mechanical operation has been very slight since I have come in. I've
kept almost the same general method of organization. What happens is that each of the
individual members of the Editorial Board discusses at greater or lesser length with the
editor of the editorial page-who in my career from '49 to '61 was Charles Merz-the topic
that that editor is going to write on that day. Usually it is one topic, occasionally it is more
© 2006 Columbia University
Libraries | Oral History
Research Office | Rights and
Permissions | Help