Previous | Next
8990919293949596979899100101102103104105106107108109110111112113114115116117118119 of 512
some ways more effective censorship than a direct censorship. So what are you going to do,
label all stories that have any remote touch of censorship, subject to censor? If you don't do
that, you're really not being fair with your readers.
This problem isn't as simple as it seems. It seems so easy to say, “Yes, we ought to label
everything that goes through censor.” There are so many variations of this that I think it is
highly doubtful-I see that this question isn't as easy as all that, and I'm glad that I'm not
the one that has to make that decision as to what to do about it.
[inaudible] is there a particular thing that you did, or was it just a general overall
award in the [re: Catherwood Award]?
As far as I'm aware, it was sort of a general award for general work. It wasn't
anything specific, so far as I know. I guess my one and only book which did deal with some
aspects of foreign policy and foreign affairs, I don't think had been published at the time I
was given that award. So that certainly wasn't the reason.
How does the editorial board select its members?
In the first place, I'm always looking for good editorial writers. I sort of am on a
permanent hunt for good editorial people, but to try to answer your question a little more
specifically, I would say that when I need somebody, I prefer to look first within the Times
family, because I think there is something to be said for people growing up in the Times
© 2006 Columbia University
Libraries | Oral History
Research Office | Rights and
Permissions | Help