Part: 1234         Session: 1234         Page 262263264265266267268269270271272273274275276277278279280281282283284285286287288289290291292293294295296297298299300301302303304305306307 of 512

And fourthly, in addition to those other three kinds of things - the original articles, the reprints, the documentation - fourthly, something that we really practically have never done, which is, put in editorials from other publications and similar expressions of views different from those of the Times. I also wanted to add those Q heads to the Op-Ed page, but Cliff Daniel put the KO on that.

That was content. Then on form, we went over dummies that had been made up by the head of the Times art department, and we had the form, as we more or less agreed on it, would require approximately eight additional articles per week, we thought, plus six reprints, plus eight selections of speeches, editorials and so on. Well, what that actually became was really two or three original articles almost all the time, with very occasional other things. And we were going to restore the daily poem, which the publisher had required me to drop, I think with the idea of saving money. I thought the poem should be restored.

Now, on December 30th, 1966, the publisher sent me another memo, recalling that he'd asked me to chair that study group on Op-Ed, and asking me in January to give him a report on the areas of agreement and disagreement. So that's an outline of the early history of the page.

Perhaps I should have said at the outset, I made a reference to having asked the views of my editorial associates about such a page, and I just want to supplement that a little bit by saying that I had put out such a request early, in the spring at least of 1966, asked each of them to give me his view on an Op-Ed page and on its content, and I have in my files a