Changing of the Editorial Guard


July 28, 2001


BROOKE GLADSTONE: 06:00 From WNYC in New York this is On the Media. I'm Brooke Gladstone.
BOB GARFIELD: And I'm Bob Garfield.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: Last week as we memorialized the passing of Washington Post publisher Katherine Graham, another historic figure departed journalism's arena -- Robert Bartley who spent the better part of 30 years transforming the Wall Street Journal's editorial page into what is regarded as the prime mover of conservative thought in America has retired. Bartley has passed the torch to the Journal's Washington columnist Paul Gigot who joins us now. Welcome to the show!
PAUL GIGOT: Good to be with you!
BROOKE GLADSTONE: This is a tricky question to throw at you right off the bat, but why not? The Journal's editorial page is at the same time probably the most read and probably the most reviled in the country! Let's face it, the, the editor of the National Review said rather than making grand pronouncements the Journal's willing to knock the teeth out of its opponents. It's a ferocious page!
PAUL GIGOT: I don't think -- I wouldn't describe it as ferocious. I would say that we're not a "on the one hand, on the other hand" page. I think our style is - it can be pugnacious at times, but if our style is so ferocious I think that we must be doing something right, because Howell Raines of the New York Times when he was editorial page editor did seem to imitate some of the, the style of, of, of Bartley and what Bob Bartley liked to call "muzzle velocity" for editorials. But I think it's too much to say we're ferocious.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:And you say the New York Times or, or rather the New York Times under Howell Raines made an alteration in its pages -- by that you mean it--
PAUL GIGOT: Stylistically. Stylistically. I mean he, he revved up the RPMs. He also adopted one other thing that I think was a Bartley innovation which is the campaign. That is if you get an, an issue which you really are promoting -- in Howell Raines's case it was camp--has been campaign finance reform -- you keep going back and you keep going back. We've done that with supply side economics, tax cutting--
BROOKE GLADSTONE: And specifically and probably overwhelmingly Whitewater.
PAUL GIGOT: The-- the, the Clinton ethics story, broadly defined; no question.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:This may distress you a bit Mr. Gigot, but even liberals hail you as the "smart guy conservative" -- somebody willing to lay out a well-reasoned argument to defend conservative policies and even think outside party rhetoric on occasion--
PAUL GIGOT: You trying to damage my career?
BROOKE GLADSTONE: I - yeah, I'm really-- [LAUGHTER] just think of it now - with every word is going down, down, down. Everyone writing about this seems to expect a kinder, gentler editorial page under your watch. Is that what you plan to give it?
PAUL GIGOT: Well, I'm a sweet guy--; we'll see. I mean it's going to be mostly the same staff which I think is a tremendous staff, and philosophically-- I'm very similar to-- to, to Bob Bartley.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:You may very well share most of Mr. Bartley's opinions and, and those of the editorial page, but-- not that many people listen to this show, so just tell me -- haven't you ever read the page and gone -- ogh! That really went too far.
PAUL GIGOT: Yeah, I have. On occasion I have read the page -- on occasion I've read my column after I've written it [LAUGHTER] and I've said -- you went too far. So--[LAUGHS] I, I, I think that is an occupational hazard.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: Now you're a political guy. Your, your column that you've written from Washington is called Potomac Watch. But when I think of issues concerning family values -- homosexuality, abortion -- I don't immediately associate them with the opinion of Paul Gigot! How are you planning to handle these social issues?
PAUL GIGOT: Actually I've written a fair number of pieces about abortion politics and abortion policy over the years. I don't disagree with the Journal's editorial page position on that which has been that-- we're kind of in the middle. That is, we think that Roe v. Wade was wrongly decided because it was judicial fiat. When it comes to the gay issue-- I'm-- we--have written about it from time to time but mostly - I think most recently only when it comes to the Boy Scouts and their First Amendment rights which we believe their First Amendment rights to, to hire the scoutmasters they want.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: Now you said that the paper's editorial page was opposed to Roe v. Wade because it was judicial fiat.
PAUL GIGOT: Right.
BROOKE GLADSTONE:I didn't actually look it up, but then I can assume you were also opposed to the Supreme Court decision with regard to the Florida recount.
PAUL GIGOT: [LAUGHS] Oh, that's highly tendentious. I think those are completely separate issues.
BROOKE GLADSTONE: Well-- Paul Gigot, thank you very much.
PAUL GIGOT: Thank you.
BOB GARFIELD: Recently a big change at the other most influential editorial page -- that of the New York Times. Times' Op-Ed columnist Gail Collins will take over from Howell Raines who has been elevated to the paper's editorship. Collins' work is known for sharp political humor on what is seen as a generally liberal editorial page. She joins us now. Welcome to On the Media!
GAIL COLLINS: Thank you!
BOB GARFIELD: Well first of all, congratulations!
GAIL COLLINS: Thanks!
BOB GARFIELD: This is really something! After a long and distinguished career as a reporter and a columnist, you've been promoted to--anonymity!
GAIL COLLINS: [LAUGHS] Well you know I've done that -actually I wrote my last column about a week ago, and I realized looking up on my bulletin board that I had from 1979 a column that was entitled My Last Column, and I've written last columns I think three other times since then.
BOB GARFIELD:Before Howell Raines who has just ascended to the editorship, the editorial page at the New York Times had a reputation for equivocating -for being compulsively evenhanded as opposed to - well, opinionated. Is it a tough act to follow?
GAIL COLLINS: Howell is an extraordinarily tough act to follow, but on the other hand I gave up a column to come to the Times to write editorials because of Howell, because it was so clear to me that he made this so much --writing editorials seem to be so much fun, and so exciting.
BOB GARFIELD:Now obviously the New York Times isn't just another newspaper. When it itches, governments all over the world scratch. But a big part of the job involves - I mean not - I can't think of a more felicitous way of phrasing this - elites writing for elites!
GAIL COLLINS: Well-- I think one of the attractions of the page is that you do have a sense that like decision-makers read it. I don't know that it influences the decisions so much as it influences the conversation but that's the important thing about the Times -- that it does sort of in-- have a big voice in the national conversation about important issues. And-- to that extent you're writing for elites, but if the stuff that you write isn't written in a way that regular people --regular readers want to read it -- I guarantee you the elites [LAUGHS] -- the elites aren't that diligent themselves. They're not going to necessarily even follow through. You've got to be able to write stuff that's --everybody wants to read.
BOB GARFIELD:When politicians are given free rein to write on the editorial pages -- famously or maybe infamously the New York Times has been in that position itself when it allowed Bill Clinton to explain his pardons of Marc Rich. Did anything happen at the New York Times to re-examine the policy of giving editorial space over to politicians?
GAIL COLLINS: No, but I must say that I was I think in China when that happened, so I, I can't really comment on what people said or didn't say.
BOB GARFIELD:All right. Fair enough. But I'm wondering if the things that have happened in the past, like the Bill Clinton episode; like the-- Wen Ho Lee episode, are going to inform the way you run the pages.
GAIL COLLINS: Well everything that the Times has done informs the pages in the sense that we have this enor--no, not enormous but we have a very strongly-held and fairly extensive list of core beliefs that we just have always believed in and you know, the issues change every day, and the things that were written about last year or the year before are probably not going to have much direct bearing on the things that are written about next year.
BOB GARFIELD: Congratulations again, and thanks for joining us!
GAIL COLLINS: Thanks very much.
BOB GARFIELD: Gail Collins is the newly-anointed editorial page editor of the New York Times. [MUSIC TAG]