Part: 1234         Session: 123         Page 120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151 of 512

situation in which the editorial page would be required to produce something that the editor didn't approve of. This literally never occurred during this period.

A good deal of this ease of communication rested on the close relationship of individuals. I think you can see that this kind of thing is a very delicate thing because it involves the fact that you have a man that is ultimately responsible for what the page and the paper say- namely, the publisher-and the man who is immediately responsible for the day-to-day statement of what is going into the page, and if he values his own standards at all, certainly isn't going to be willing to put into that page-even if he isn't the ultimate, final boss- things with which he disagrees. So this is a very close and delicate thing. I'm sure that publishers and editors have had this problem as long as there have been publishers and editors.

At any rate, after Mr. Dryfoos died, we have a new publisher who is Mr. Sulzberger's son. This intimate personal relationship has not been established to the degree that I had with Orvil Dryfoos before and that Mr. Merz had with Mr. Sulzberger Sr. before. The problem has come up in the last few months of just where the delimitations of responsibility between publisher and editor lie. This problem, which I have indicated in what I have said before, is a very, very difficult one when you have two fairly strong-minded characters involved. Punch [Arthur Ochs] Sulzberger, quite rightly, feels that he has to take responsibility for what the New York Times says editorially. This I fully recognize, and this is quite completely in line with the position as it has always been recognized, but the difficulty comes-and has come in a few instances in the past year-when there are either certain specific statements that we have made editorially that he doesn't like and therefore