Free Republic

If recently retired New York Times publisher, Arthur O. "Pinch" Sulzberger, expected to finally receive some respect now that he has turned the keys of his newspaper kingdom over to his son, A.G. (Arthur Gregg) Sulzberger, he would be quite disappointed after reading the January 14 Politico Magazine story. Senior Media Writer Jack Shafer ridicules Sulzberger and how he ran the Times during his quarter century reign there until he retired on January 1. The profile of just how out of his depth the elder Sulzberger was is brought to us as part of advice to Sulzberger the Younger in...

"We Suck Less." This is the catchphrase used by New York Times publisher Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger Jr. to describe his operating and journalism philosophy. It is his "pet" expression, throwing out the initials "W.S.L." in answer to those who comment upon the dire straits of the news industry or complain about his stewardship of the newspaper he inherited. This explains, in part, the screams this week by the Times, casting opposition to the policies of President Obama as racism. Disagree with the Democrat version of socialism? Racism. Object to awarding billions in taxpayer dollars to Acorn thugs? Racism. Oppose ObamaCare?...

Arthur Ochs "Pinch" Sulzberger Jr. has driven the proudest institution in journalism to the doorstep of ruin, its corporate debt earning the humiliating label of "junk" from Moody's Investors Services. And it wasn't just a slide over the line, the company tumbled three steps below investment grade. Even worse is Moody's negative expectation, meaning further downgrades are on the horizon in the next 12-18 months. Moody's has withdrawn its rating for NYTCo commercial paper, its unsecured corporate borrowing. Nobody in his right mind is going to loan the company money that way anymore. The terms of the company's $250 million...

Although the New York Times circulation has been plummeting like a lot of other newspapers due to readers switching to the Internet for their news as well as being turned off by the extreme liberal bias at that newspaper, the ultimate failure of that periodical might be due to another reason according to an article in New York Magazine. Sulzberger stupidity. And based on what New York has to say, we aren't talking about the ordinary garden style variety stupidity here. Sulberger stupidity comes on a massive scale of unerringly poor judgement in almost every major business decision. The prime...

David Freddoso at National Review Online pointed out a gem on the editorial page of Tuesday morning's New York Sun, "The Non-Sulzberger Death Tax," revealing the liberal hypocrisy of the Times' publisher (emphasis added). It's not every day that one finds a tax policy argument in the world-famous gossip column of the New York Post, but there it was yesterday in "Page Six": The news was that the publisher of the New York Times, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., had sold his Upper West Side apartment to his wife for $3.25 million for what a Times spokeswoman described as "estate-planning purposes." The editors of...

What qualifies one to be a publisher at the New York Times? Apparently living through birth...if your name is Sulzberger. Other than that, Pinch Sulzberger is totally unqualified to be the publisher of even a freebie rag you see on the stands outside of supermarkets. So is that my own vicious rightwing conclusion? No. Liberal Jay Rosen, who teaches journalism at New York University, also believes that Pinch Sulzberger has serious problems due to the New York Times "McCain Scandal" story as you can see in his HUffington POst BLOG titled, "For the New York Times, as Well, Self-Confidence...

IN 1972, Arthur Ochs Sulzberger, the publisher of The New York Times, was looking for a conservative columnist for his left-leaning Op-Ed page. At a charity dinner, he wound up sitting next to William Safire, the Nixon White House speechwriter who coined Spiro Agnew’s famous denunciation of the press as “nattering nabobs of negativism.” They soon had a deal. But, as described in “The Trust,” the authoritative history of the family that has controlled The Times for more than a century, Sulzberger neglected to involve John Oakes, his cousin and the editor of the editorial page, in the decision. Oakes...

Sometimes chronicling media bias and hypocrisy is just too easy. You couldn't have asked for better material than what was provided Wednesday by the New York Times which ran a thousand-word-plus article discussing the alleged nepotism of Commentary’s hiring of John Podhoretz to run the magazine. I’ll grant that this type of character assassination article is typical when it comes to the liberal press’s normal gorillas-in-the-mist view of conservatism. Still, you’d think that the Times might be a little more inclined to avoid such journalism when its prestige and profits have been on a downward spiral ever since publisher Arthur...

What is Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger's main qualification for being publisher of the New York Times? According to Huffington Post blogger, John Ridley, it is living through birth. Although generally liberal, Ridley sometimes refreshingly breaks from the leftwing party line as I have noted when he accused the Democrat presidential candidates of being cowardly for refusing to appear at debates sponsored by Fox News. Now Ridley's ire is directed against Pinch Sulzberger in his Huffington Post blog of yesterday, "How the New York Times Betrays Us." According to the Times own public editor, the MoveOn/Betray Us ad the Times ran on Monday, Sept....

In reference to the liberal New York Times' publisher, the new owner of the Wall Street Journal, Rupert Murdoch, said in a recent interview reported by Editor and Publisher, "I won’t meddle any more than Arthur Sulzberger does…. I just think The Journal needs a little more urgency.” According to the report, there may be some changes at the venerable newspaper under its pending new leadership. "We have lots of decisions to make,” Murdoch said. "How much should we really spend developing the Saturday paper? What should we do digitally? Should we remain subscription-based on the Web, or should we...

Many on the left regard Rupert Murdoch, architect of the rise of Fox News Channel, as the anti-Christ. More accurately, Murdoch deserves the title of the anti-Pinch. Murdoch's successful bid to take over Dow Jones & Company, publisher of Wall Street Journal, is a nightmare-come-true for Pinch Sulzberger, the hereditary occupant of the chairman of the board's and publisher's office at the New York Times. Poor Pinch. Murdoch is everything that he is not. Conservative, smart, and wildly successful in the media business. As a result, Pinch faces serious challenges as a family member, business leader and corporate strategist....

 NEW YORK, July 22 (Reuters) - The public editor at the New York Times on Sunday castigated the newspaper for not writing enough about its owner -- the Ochs-Sulzberger family -- and whether it will succumb to the same pressure that forced The Wall Street Journal into the grasp of Rupert Murdoch. Public editor Clark Hoyt wrote in the paper's Sunday edition that The New York Times is missing a good story in its own backyard. Part of Hoyt's job is to be the readers' representative at the paper. Hoyt said today's New York Times is caught in unprecedented changes...

March 15, 2007 -- Even steep losses at The New York Times didn't stop its family owners from enriching themselves and insiders with bonuses for making "profits" when there were none. Although its board acknowledged in filings yesterday that the media company lost $3.76 per share in 2006, directors revised its bottom-line bonus formula to exclude embarrassing write-downs, converting millions in losses into instant profits of $1.58 per share. [snip] However, citing the tough year ahead for the Times, Sulzberger turned it down and instead took just a $560,521 cash bonus - the same amount of his cash bonus from...

The New York Times Co. reeled yesterday from a 39 percent drop in profits as it came under a surprise attack from liberal politicians for gutting and damaging its sister Boston Globe...... pressure mounted on chief Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger to plug a drain of newspaper ad dollars being steadily siphoned away by the Internet. The profits bomb came as Sulzberger got scolded yesterday by a group of prominent politicians and business leaders in Boston, led by Sen. Edward Kennedy (D-Mass.), claiming Sulzberger and his team have committed a "terrible shame" by gutting the paper since acquiring it in 1993. In...

The New York Times warned yesterday that its profit would fall short of Wall Street's expectations as it struggles to keep advertising dollars flowing into the newspaper giant. The latest bad news from the Gray Lady follows similar announcements from Wall Street Journal publisher Dow Jones and Dallas Morning News publisher Belo, as advertiser demand for print publications remains weak. The company has been on a rocky road the past year as a combination of an ad slump and uneven management upset shareholders. Just last week, Chairman Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger and his cousin, Vice Chairman Michael Golden, said they would...

 It is sad to watch a once-great company decline. Jobs are sacrificed, historic facilities closed, and an atmosphere of failure and fear usually permeates the surviving operations. When a company needs to sell-off profitable crown jewels to sustain the lagging less profitable pieces, it does not portend future happiness.But when the situation is compounded by hereditary management succession based on family control, and when the hapless scion put into Daddy’s office leads the firm into blunder after blunder, squandering the resources built up by previous generations, elements of tragedy enter the picture. When the bloodline-based boss is both obsessed with a private agenda and...

WHY BIN LADEN WANTS HOME DELIVERY OF THE NEW YORK TIMESby Mia T, 7.11.06 IN A 'PINCH': RETHINKING THE FIRST AMENDMENT(Which came first, the 'journalist' or the traitor?) by Mia T, 6.27.06 "What is government itself but the greatest of all reflections on human nature? If men were angels, no government would be necessary. If angels were to govern men, neither external nor internal controls on government would be necessary." James Madison hen the founders granted 'The Press' special dispensation, they never considered the possibility that traitors in our midst would game the system. But that is precisely what...

PINCH SULZBERGER, PEARL HARBOR + TREASONWHY WE MUST PROSECUTE THE NEW YORK TIMES by Mia T, 06.26.06       hy must we prosecute Pinch Sulzberger and The New York Times? The answer is really quite simple. And it is independent of the legalities1. It must be independent of the legalities. Prosecuting Sulzberger and the Times is both a moral and a survival imperative: If we don't prosecute them, if we declare Sulzberger and the Times untouchable by virtue of their press status, it follows that anyone intent on doing this country harm can simply call himself 'the press'...

  WAR AND TREASON AND THE NEW YORK TIMES by Mia T, December 29, 2005       inch Sulzberger rushed to the C-SPAN confessional booth mere days after 9/11. He had to make certain no one would blame The New York Times for that. The Times' '96 endorsement of bill clinton1 was the problem. The endorsement, you may recall, was contingent on clinton getting a brain transplant--specifically of the character lobe.2 How could The Times square that shameful, irresponsible endorsement with this monstrous failure3? Sulzberger quickly explained that The Times was able to endorse clinton by separating clinton's "policies"...

NY Times headquarters Investors are increasing their bets that the slumping New York Times stock, which has plunged 25 percent in the past year, won't bounce back anytime soon. Short sellers, who profit when a stock's price falls, increased their positions to 14.6 million shares in April. Short sellers held 14 million shares in March and just 6.4 million shares last April. The blossoming short selling in Times stock is a key sign that investors feel the newspaper titan and its boss, Arthur "Pinch" Sulzberger, Jr., have done little to quell stockholder unrest that cropped up at its mid-April...