Part: 1234         Session: 1234         Page 262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307 of 512

The distinction there is, as I was just explaining to you, we were running a regular contribution from members of the editorial board every Monday, and we also were running Topics, and I ran this first one as such, and then I added that “it is our intention to make such use of all worthwhile articles that come to hand until the Op-Ed page is actually established.”

It may have been from that time on that these outside articles that I have referred to (viz: Agnew, Lodge, etc.) were run. I would have to go to the files to make sure how may of them or if any of them had been run earlier than that, but in any case, this was very much linked with the development of the Op-Ed page.

Then, in addition to that, we had decided that we would use reprints from a wide variety of academic, intellectual, and/or relatively obscure magazines. And thirdly, we would run speeches and statements and papers of interest that are not published in the daily. I was privately a little worried about what I saw as a tendency in the daily, even as early as 1966, a tendency that I believe has vastly snowballed in the twelve years since then, not to print all the documentation that, of current events, that the Times used to print, and to go too easy on texts of important stuff. Of course the Times, then and subsequently has always published really major texts, but I felt that we were beginning to crowd out of the paper texts that really deserved to be in any paper that claimed to be a paper of record. And I had in the back of my mind the idea of occasionally running such documents on the Op-Ed page, which in fact we have very occasionally done.