From today’s Democracy Now:

AMY GOODMAN: Why did the piece appear in the London Review of Books and 
not in your traditional place where you publish, in The New Yorker or, 
as it was expected to appear, in The Washington Post, with Executive 
Editor Marty Baron saying the sourcing in the article didn’t meet the 
Post’s standards?

SEYMOUR HERSH: Well, that’s what he told me in an—or one of his editors 
said in an email, after the story, when it had been, I thought, 
scheduled to run for a few weeks, was—and, you know, he’s—look, he’s the 
boss. He’s a rational, good editor, and he’s entitled to say it didn’t 
meet—the information I got is that it didn’t meet the standards of The 
Washington Post. And I respect that. He’s no fool, you know, and I don’t 
know the guy, but everything I heard about him is that he’s a very 
competent editor. I know people that worked with him when he was that 
the L.A. Times, which he was. And so, I don’t begrudge an editor to say 
what he wants. You know, look, people like me, we really wear out 
welcomes very quickly. You know, sometimes you get tired of reporters 
coming in and saying, you know, the sky is always black, and it’s not 
sunny. And that’s what we do. So, investigative reporters, we have a 
very short shelf life. You know, we’re the Bad News Bears.

_______________________________________________
pen-l mailing list
[email protected]
https://lists.csuchico.edu/mailman/listinfo/pen-l

Reply via email to