Bill Keller is an embarassment to his profession today. Worse, Arthur Sulzberger is an embarassment to his family. The hapless, befuddled executive editor of The New York Times and his primogeniture-cursed boss have added the pathetic ThursdayStyles to their lineup of special sections, replacing the popular Circuits, which covered consumer technology. The result is a public humiliation for the newspaper, happy guffaws thumping from the chests of rivals, chump change from advertisers peddling luxe goods, and more evidence that the citadel on West 43rd Street is even further out of touch with the world than even its harshest critics previously believed.
Formerly, Circuits did a decent job on reviewing new technology, discussing the advance of digital media, debating issues of copyright and intellectual property, and providing tips to consumers. Led by its terrific David Pogue weekly column, the section was relevant, lively and - importantly in a more distributed media world - much-discussed elsewhere in the digital landscape, on its own message boards, in blogs, and so forth. Now, it's been gutted and left to die the death of content not wanted in the back of the Thursday business section.
Today, this is what Keller and Sulzberger gave us in its place, the featurette that has led to their self-inflicted public humiliation:
It's nice to know that American men haven't taken recent corporate scandals lying down. No siree. They sucked in their guts, bade farewell to their families and hurried to the mall. The urge to look corporate - sleek, commanding, prudent, yet with just a touch of hubris on your well-cut sleeve - is an unexpected development in a time of business disgrace.
Let me just say this: the scandal-plagued world of big business doesn't need a touch of hubris on its well-cut sleeve. No siree. And the Times (it's lost the traditional right to the uppercase "T" with this debacle, in my view) does not need more mindless fluff like this in its lineup, not in an age when few people automatically trust its reporting anymore, when traditional news-gathering is under attack, when reporting is too often viewed as a hackneyed, lying, corrupt profession. No siree.
I'm guessing Al Siegal didn't edit these next few blurbs, but damn I'd love to have seen his face this morning as he edged from his office on the verge of the newsroom, ThursdayStyles shaking unsteadily in his veteran's hands, red rage spilling down his jowls. Did he resign, I wonder? OK, just a taste:
Many men dress well for the pleasure of it and because they know that clothes can telegraph all kinds of messages, above all belonging.
People with darker complexions tend to be the most vulnerable to laser peel damage, often seeing an uneven coloration after a treatment. Fraxel is less likely to have that effect.
There's a growing subculture of shaving mugs and rich lathers, a world of bristle brushes and razors with a little heft to them.
Ah, I could go on, but won't. And you know, it ain't personal. Heck, Circuits once cost me a nice gig with the NYT. Back when it launched in the late 90s, the print section replaced many features of the old CyberTimes, where Chervokas and I were columnists under Rob Fixmer's watchul eye for a few years. Then, after a brutal lunch with the new editor, Tim "Master" Race, we were out. So be it. I still enjoyed the section, especially as it grew and matured. Pogue's work has been particularly good (it was nipping at Walt Mossberg's heels until ordered to Siberia), but I'll miss the contributions of back-in-the-day friends like Lisa Napoli and Pamela O'Connell as well.
So now the Times has too much style, and far less substance. But you know, I think Andrew van den Houten, 25, "a filmmaker in New York [who] is having the tailor Alan Flusser make him a three-button gray suit and shirts for meetings" really summed it up best:
"It's a mature way to have edge. It's a little bit peacocky."
I'm sure that's what Keller and Sulzberger thought as well. They should fire the tailor.
