The Times Are Changing

If you're a registered FOX Fan, you can now watch My Word in Our "Screening Room"! If you haven't signed up yet, don't waste another minute. Click here for access to premium content.

The New York Times is getting a new editor.

If you are like me, and you oppose the Times' most overt political positions — anti-gun, pro-abortion, anti-death penalty, anti-drilling in ANWR... just to name a few — you have to be a little nervous that the next regime won't be just as politically active as the next.

Why does it matter if the Times is overtly political? Because it is so powerful, because it sets the tone in so many other news organizations, and because political and media leaders look to its pages for facts, not opinions. There are plenty of other places where opinions are running around loose, like right here on this part of my show.

It's not a surprise that Jayson Blair (search)'s two top bosses got fired. They mismanaged him, and let him stain the reputation of the paper by not only looking the other way when he lied and plagiarized, but by completely hiding it from bosses who should have  been able to pick up the clues. They didn't even bother to check if he really went to the places from which he was supposed to be reporting.

They might not have checked because they were spending their time making sure the Times was politically correct and represented the views of their lefty, liberal publisher, his friends, and their acquaintances on the Upper East and West sides of Manhattan.

What was always surprising to me was not that the Times decided to be liberal, but that it decided to be anything. It had huge power and respect as an arbiter of facts and truth, and it gave it all away to fight conservatives.

The two top guys got fired. Shame it was too late.

What do you think? We'd like to hear from you, so send us your comments at Some of your emails will be featured on the air or on our site.

Looking for some previous My Word columns?
  Click here!