A controversial column in the New York Times prompted a staff backlash at the prestigious paper before bosses decided - a little too late - it was not fit to print
The New York Times logo on a computer screen with a magnifying glass (Flickr user Marco Verch CC BY 2.0) Photo: Flickr user Marco Verch CC BY 2.0)
The author of the controversial call for boots on the ground - headlined Send in The Troops - was Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas and an ally of President Trump.
“One thing above all else will restore order to our streets - an overwhelming show of force to disperse, detain and ultimately deter lawbreakers,” he wrote.
In his op-ed, Cotton claims that "the rioting has nothing to do with George Floyd, whose bereaved relatives have condemned violence."
“The riots were a carnival for the thrill-seeking rich,“ he claimed.
He also described the protests as "an orgy of violence . . . orchestrated by a “cadres of left-wing radicals.”
On CNN, former general Wesley Clark - who commanded NATO troops in the Kosovo conflict in 1999 - said Senator Cotton's opinion was badly wrong, but he backed the paper's publication of it.
Predictably there was a backlash from those who didn't think of was fit for the paper to publish online - but notably, it began in the New York Times' own newsroom.
More than 800 staff members signed a letter of protest to editors and New York Times executives.
The letter argued that Sen. Cotton’s article was not only inflammatory, but contained misinformation,
James Bennet, the editor in charge of the opinion section, hit back.
“Many readers find Senator Cotton’s argument painful, even dangerous. But we believe that is one reason it requires public scrutiny and debate,” he said
Dozens of Times' staffers made their feelings known on social media, in defiance of a company policy that instructs them not to post partisan comments or take sides on issues.
And media writers of other outlets didn't hold back either.
There are many things to say about the Tom Cotton oped, and I said some, and might say some more. ... But here's a useful and common norm in a newsroom: "Hey, boss, you might want to take a look at this one before it runs."
— Margaret Sullivan (@Sulliview) June 5, 2020
The New York Times used to have a public editor to oversee its ethics in cases like this. After it scrapped the post in 2017, the Columbia Journalism Review appointed one itself in 2019 - Gabriel Snyder, formerly an editor at The New Republic and The Atlantic.
"The Times fails in its mission to seek the truth when it lends its platform to others to tell lies," he said on Friday, condemning Senator Collins' column as “not only reprehensible but dishonest” - and not fit for print.
Soon after, chastened executives also decided it “did not meet its standards” and later confirm the article would not appear in the pages of any printed edition of the paper.
James Bennet then told staff he had not read the essay himself before it was published.
Bennet admitted that the opinion page requested the article and had seen Cotton’s inflammatory tweets on the subject.
"We did ask if he could stand up that argument," he told The Daily Beast..
The absence of a convincing response didn't prevent them from putting the piece online though.
The New York Times apologised to its staff on Friday "in a lengthy, tense meeting," it said.
Meanwhile, the paper's editorial failure has been picked over in excruciating detail by rivals - with some measure of glee.
