Quote

I believe our editorial decisions reflected our constant desire to make sure that we fully cover and analyze any issue and give our viewers all the information they need.

Editorials are, obviously, pieces of opinion journalism. They are not intended to be dispassionate, balanced accountings of a news situation or issue. They present a strong and strongly argued position and do not necessarily present or even take into account the opposing position.

One thing I can say right off the bat is that creating great editorial is a huge challenge, and you can't help but go through the process and not appreciate how valuable this skill is, and how much I admire the people who do this every day.

People sort of take it for granted, but the more you see of the media world the more you appreciate a paper like the Times where its family continues to invest in editorial quality and I think it's the truly is the best paper in the world.

Point-of-view is a matter that readers rarely pay attention to, yet it's one of the most important story decisions an author makes.

I think it is valuable and should be valued by its consumers. Charging for content forces discipline on journalists: they must produce things that people actually value.

In essence, I see the value of journalism as resting in a twofold mission: informing the public of accurate and vital information, and its unique ability to provide a truly adversarial check on those in power.

I have no idea what readership is of written editorials, but it doesn't come anywhere close to the readership of editorial cartoons.

We're journalists, so our default position is we're not writing editorial. We're trying to bring information to readers, viewers, so that they can make up their own conclusions.

I think when you're knee-deep in coming up with editorial plans, the desire to sit down and pencil something is pretty strong.