Part: 1234         Session: 1234         Page 222223224225226227228229230231232233234235236237238239240241242243244245246247248249250251252253254255256257258259260261 of 512

that he wants to make this paper a success financially. He didn't want to be the chap who was running a newspaper that was a financial cripple, and I can understand that.

Now, in fairness I have to say also that the people who are doing all this on the paper would deny with their last breath that anything they have done is, has in any sense eroded the basic quality of the Times that I have been talking about. They say that this is addition. Rosenthal makes this statement all the time, that this is all addition, that this is not any subtraction from the -

The news total is as big as it always was.

Yes. That's the claim. I frankly doubt that, even statistically, but whether it's true or not statistically, what is undeniably true is that the - I come back to this word erosion, that the unique quality of the Times as strictly a newspaper is no longer what it was. It is a newspaper of much broader appeal, and in making that broader appeal to the so-called suburban housewife, and that's to whom it's basically directed. It, I feel, has changed the focus of the paper, and not merely because an awful lot of the reporters, the people who are writing for the paper, are now doing, writing for all these special sections, as well as doing what they used to do.

In a sense, it's an illustration of how underutilized they were.

Well, that may well be true. That may well be true. That's Rosenthal's, that's exactly what he says in defense of this. On the other hand, the morale in the -