NYT columnist's conflict of interest

[lilpup]

Most Detroit auto insiders know that NY Times auto reporter Micheline Maynard wrote a book touting "The End of Detroit" and used her high profile nationwide bully pulpit pretty consistently to bash the US auto companies.

Now another weasel can be added to the list:

Most reporters would love to make $75,000. In a year.

So it set my eyes to blinking when I read that New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman got paid that much for a single speech, sponsored last week by the San Francisco Bay Area's clean air district.

http://www.latimes.com/entertainment...1226938.column

[ghettopalmetto]

How does Micheline Maynard fit into Friedman's speech? I don't see the conflict of interest you claim.

[lilpup]

You don't see a link between Friedman getting $75K from an environmental lobbying group [[violating NY Times ethics policy) and his ivory tower bashing of the US auto industry?

You don't see any parallel to the NY Times writer who behaves similarly by writing a book for personal gain will supposedly remaining an objective reporter covering the industry?

[otter]

No, not really.

O.

[otter]

No, not really.

O.

[rb336]

Using something one person does that is unethical to bash someone else is irrational

[lilpup]

BOTH are unethical!!

[otter]

What is it that you think is unethical in each case?

O.

[lilpup]

Reporters are supposed to maintain objectivity. Maynard's book shouldn't have been published while she was still actively covering the industry, especially for a major outlet like the New York Times.

There's no debate in Friedman's case, accepting [[and returning only under pressure after scrutiny) a massive speaking fee from a political/lobbying organization. That's pointedly a violation of the New York Times' policy [[as was pointed out in the L.A. Times piece).

[ccbatson]

It is not unethical...but it is a fine illustration of the ulterior motives that compel these environmentalists....a different kind of green, and it has nothing to do with CO2. Al Gore is the best example to date. He went from a net worth of 5 million, to over 110 million in 5 years based on his hoax. NEVER HELD A REAL JOB in the process.

[otter]

Pup, I later read the LAT article linked, and I can see your point in his case. I do not see a conflict of interest [[Friendman is an op-ed writer for the NYT, not a reporter) but accepting the honorarium seemed questionable at best and the paper's excuse for it seems lame. As fro Maynard publishing a book on the same topics that she reports on, what is unusual about this? What about, say, Dexter Filkins' book?

O.

[lilpup]

It is unusual for a reporter to write a book about a business industry they are covering at the time for a newspaper. Filkins' book was about his personal experiences covering Iraq and Afghanistan ie. the wars, not [[in theory) business ventures that can be damaged by an author/high profile outlet writer potentially with an agenda or ax to grind.

[rb336]

It is not unethical...but it is a fine illustration of the ulterior motives that compel these environmentalists....a different kind of green, and it has nothing to do with CO2. Al Gore is the best example to date. He went from a net worth of 5 million, to over 110 million in 5 years based on his hoax. NEVER HELD A REAL JOB in the process.

get over it Bats, he is rright, you are wrong. you have yet to provide ANYTHING to refute GW except for crap from fossil-fuel industry hacks like horner[[with whose OBVIOUS ulterior motives you have no problem, another bit of evidence that all your claims of rationality and logic are purely BS)

btw -- what is your proof of his increase in net worth and its source? oh, that's right, you never have to do that

ps -- was that you I saw on old woodward in his viper?

[ghettopalmetto]

Reporters are supposed to maintain objectivity. Maynard's book shouldn't have been published while she was still actively covering the industry, especially for a major outlet like the New York Times.

There's no debate in Friedman's case, accepting [[and returning only under pressure after scrutiny) a massive speaking fee from a political/lobbying organization. That's pointedly a violation of the New York Times' policy [[as was pointed out in the L.A. Times piece).

Let me make sure I understand this. Micheline Maynard isn't supposed to write a book on the topic about which she writes?

[lilpup]

Not while she's still actively covering it [[supposedly "objectively") as a reporter at a major media outlet.

[ccbatson]

Read the sources referred to by Horner if you have a problem with him....remember that skeptics do not have the burden of proof, they simply need to point out the absence of proof for the person/or group making the claim.

I am surprised how many Vipers there are around here [[a guy around the block, has one, and another in an adjacent neighborhood THAT I KNOW OF, 3 in less than a square mile. The VCA headquarters is nearby as well. I don't believe that was me on Old Woodward that you saw, but....??? Who knows?

[ghettopalmetto]

Not while she's still actively covering it [[supposedly "objectively") as a reporter at a major media outlet.

Oh, that's right. God forbid people get a bad impression of the auto industry from someone with in-depth knowledge. We must suppress any negativity about anything related to Detroit, right?

Maybe you should be lecturing Bob Woodward too. He's published a lot more books on politics than Maynard has on the auto industry.

[ccbatson]

When in doubt, forget the source and evaluate the merit of the content itself.

[lilpup]

Oh, that's right. God forbid people get a bad impression of the auto industry from someone with in-depth knowledge. We must suppress any negativity about anything related to Detroit, right?

Maybe you should be lecturing Bob Woodward too. He's published a lot more books on politics than Maynard has on the auto industry.

Had Maynard confined her writing to the paper where she was employed to do it it wouldn't be an issue. Or were her book just a collection of the columns she had written over the years that would not be a conflict.

Woodward's books are about politics, not an ongoing commercial industry, and even then are never about an election currently underway.

[ccbatson]

A common liberal ploy [[although not exclusive to them) is to attack the source when you don't like the content...a form of denial

[Lorax]

A common liberal ploy [[although not exclusive to them) is to attack the source when you don't like the content...a form of denial

Rather like Tush and Cheney did for eight years.

[ghettopalmetto]

Had Maynard confined her writing to the paper where she was employed to do it it wouldn't be an issue. Or were her book just a collection of the columns she had written over the years that would not be a conflict.

Woodward's books are about politics, not an ongoing commercial industry, and even then are never about an election currently underway.

In other words, you want to censor Micheline Maynard because you don't agree with some naughty things she wrote about the American auto industry. Is that correct?

[rb336]

A common liberal ploy [[although not exclusive to them) is to attack the source when you don't like the content...a form of denial

hmmmm....pot, kettle

[Detroitej72]

I am surprised how many Vipers there are around here [[a guy around the block, has one, and another in an adjacent neighborhood THAT I KNOW OF, 3 in less than a square mile. The VCA headquarters is nearby as well. I don't believe that was me on Old Woodward that you saw, but....??? Who knows?

Bats, you own a Viper?

Man, my opinion of you just rose a couple of notches, as you have great taste in cars!!!

[ccbatson]

And you agree that spewing carbon via a Viper is OK? If so, your stock just went up with me [[and I haven't mentioned the classic muscle cars that I have that make the Viper look like a Prius when it comes to CO2 emissions).