Previous | Next
120121122123124125126127128129130131132133134135136137138139140141142143144145146147148149150151 of 512
Oh, yes. The very nature of a newspaper operation is that situations change
frequently. We're not writing books, remember. I don't say that in any invidious sense at
all. But we're not writing books, we're writing a daily commentary. And although I want
that commentary to be as profound and as far-seeing as it's possible to be, it's still basically
a commentary on the world about us and not the world as it might be some years from now.
I don't want to suggest that we're forgetful of the future. One of the things that I'm trying
hardest to avoid is superficiality on the page and glibness. But it is true that an editorial
page in a daily newspaper has to be keyed much more closely to the events of the day than
I don't think I phrased that correctly. I don't mean that you would be writing that
editorial, that second editorial.
But how can you even be planning editorials more than a few weeks in advance
when you're dealing with the day's news? You never know what is going to happen. But we
do have a certain philosophy.
This is what I'm trying to get at.
The paper has a certain philosophy. I would certainly say that the Times and the
page has a philosophy. It doesn't shift with every prevailing wind. This is the only basis on
which an editor and publisher can get onto a basic understanding that is a satisfactory one;
that is, because they both think in long terms in the same way. We both have the same
long-term goals and the same basic philosophic views. Mr. Dryfoos and I did. Punch and I
© 2006 Columbia University
Libraries | Oral History
Research Office | Rights and
Permissions | Help