Bloomberg Anywhere Remote Login Bloomberg Terminal Demo Request


Connecting decision makers to a dynamic network of information, people and ideas, Bloomberg quickly and accurately delivers business and financial information, news and insight around the world.


Financial Products

Enterprise Products


Customer Support

  • Americas

    +1 212 318 2000

  • Europe, Middle East, & Africa

    +44 20 7330 7500

  • Asia Pacific

    +65 6212 1000


Industry Products

Media Services

Follow Us

Bloomberg Customers

Regarding 'Today's Dishonest Attack On The Times': Ex WSJ-er And Current NYT-er Fires Back at WSJ Editorial Page

Posted by: Jon Fine on June 30, 2006

(Gardiner Harris, who sent the following email in response to this bizarre, inflammatory and very lengthy editorial in today’s Wall Street Journal, spent a few years at the Journal before moving to the New York Times in 2003.)

From: Gardiner Harris
Sent: Friday, June 30, 2006 12:53 PM
To: [redacted, but to several top staffers at the Journal, including managing editor Paul Steiger, senior deputy managing editor Daniel Hertzberg, deputy managing editor Marcus Brauchli, DC bureau chief Gerald Seib, Dow Jones Newswires president Paul Ingrassia,and editorial page editor Paul Gigot]
Subject: Shame on the 9th floor

I thought the Wall Street Journal’s editorial page had reached a new low last week when Holman Jenkins Jr. rationalized back-dated stock-option grants. Secretly shoveling shareholder money to top executives and then lying about the practice to shareholders and the government is entirely appropriate, Mr. Jenkins opined. Thank God the Journal’s news division, in a series of important and penetrating stories, reached a different conclusion.

Then came today’s dishonest attack on the Times. While the editorial took pains to distinguish between the Journal’s editorial and news pages, it repeatedly conflated those divisions within the Times. It suggested that the Times’ editorial-page judgments about the Bush Administration, the Iraq war and government leaks drove the news division’s decision to run the Swift story. The Journal’s editorial-page editors know better.

I will leave to others arguments about the merits of the Swift story, whether it could possibly damage the war on terror, and how much credibility editors should give Bush Administration claims about intelligence findings and secrecy needs.

But were I still working for the Journal, I would be insulted that those attacking the Times were failing to curse the Journal in the same foul breath.

Gardiner Harris
The New York Times
1627 I Street NW
Washington DC 20006

Reader Comments


July 3, 2006 10:02 AM

In the last 25 years I've slowly but surely seen the WSJ turn into a tabloid.



July 6, 2006 9:10 AM

Ooh, great come back (not.) Like much of the NY Times "news" work, little or no facts much uneducated opinion. Days after 9/11, the NY Times calls for a program like SWIFT. Five years later they critize the program and expose it.

Any laws broken? Nope, but we don't like the President. Now there is a good journalistic standard.

The NY Times - Journalism not practiced here.


Temple Stark

July 9, 2006 8:11 PM

Funny how "reporting on it" becomes "critize it."


olivia meadows

July 21, 2006 4:23 PM

for the sake of humanity can someone confount the Isrealies.

this so called Christian nation is supporting the very un christian --eye for an eye concept.

Where does this loyalty to Isreal come from? how can we be silent and allow this twisted mindset to go on?

Post a comment



The media world continues to shapeshift as new forms arise and old assumptions erode. On this blog, Bloomberg Businessweek will provide sharp analysis and timely reports on the transformation of this constantly changing terrain.



BW Mall - Sponsored Links

Buy a link now!