Part: 1234         Session: 123         Page 8990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119 of 512

The big Albany spread on Page X used to make [inaudible].

In Paris, my own feeling was that in Paris, as well as in the West, although it's clearly earlier to do this in Paris, that you ought to give much greater autonomy to the Paris edition, so that they could handle news stories from the Paris point of view much more, rather than be completely guided, or really controlled from New York. I felt this was highly desirable, and I'm glad to say that it was partly because of my recommendation, because other people felt this too, but in any case, this is exactly what has been done with Paris, so that they really have almost complete autonomy. I think this is a good thing, with one big exception which I certainly am very much in favor of. I am very much in favor of the big exception of the editorial policy.

I think it will be a great mistake to have the New York Times speaking with two voices anywhere, and therefore, in all my discussions, and I feel very strongly on this point, that editorials in Paris should be, as they have been and are right up to this minute, only the editorials that appear in the New York Times, in New York. They do have to cut them sometimes for space reasons because their editorial space isn't quite the same as ours in New York. Of course they make a selection of them, too. They don't run as many as we do, but the upshot of what I'm saying is that nothing appears in Paris that doesn't also appear in New York, although more appears in New York than appears in Paris, editorially speaking. I feel this is very necessary, and I must say that the idea has been broached to me that it might not be a bad thing for Paris to have some of its own editorials on strictly local or on some subjects, but I have very strongly objected to this and will object to it, and I hope effectively into the indefinite future.