After staff uproar, New York Times rethinks 'Send in the Military' op-ed

What began as an undercurrent of newsroom grumbling built into an unusual Twitter tidal wave of public outrage among journalists at the New York Times over their newspaper's decision to publish an opinion column by Senator Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, calling for military intervention in US cities wracked by protests over police violence.

But after 24 hours of debate and acrimony - during which both the paper's publisher and editorial-page editor and publisher strongly defended the need to showcase diverse and controversial viewpoints - the paper late on Thursday abruptly announced that Cotton's op-ed was the result of a "rushed editorial process" and "did not meet our standards."

The statement from a Times spokesperson and shared online by a Times staff writer did not apologise for the op-ed nor explain if it would be marked with a correction.

One by one, dozens of Times reporters, columnists and editors had rebuked the paper's editorial page on Wednesday night for publishing the op-ed, in which Cotton of Arkansas stated that "rioters have plunged many American cities into anarchy" and that an "overwhelming show of force" is needed to "restore order to our streets."

Several staffers tweeted a message that became a kind of rallying cry: "Running this puts Black @nytimes staffers in danger."

The outcry reflected the tensions that have long existed between news and opinion sections of newspapers - separate and distinct staffs, run independently of each other while coexisting under the same brand. In less than 24 hours, both the Times publisher and editorial page editor wrote messages explaining and justifying the decision to publish Cotton's piece.

"I believe in the principle of openness to a range of opinions, even those we may disagree with, and this piece was published in that spirit," publisher A.G. Sulzberger wrote in a letter to staff on Thursday morning.

But he acknowledged that many staffers had raised concerns about many aspects of the story and promised to hear them out "with an open mind."

James Bennet, who is often mentioned as a possible successor to Times executive editor Dean Baquet, wrote in a column that, "the public would be better equipped to push back if it heard the argument and had the chance to respond to the reasoning.

Against that backdrop, several Times staff members viewed Cotton's essay as an ominous "call for military force against Americans," as Times opinion columnist Jamelle Bouie put it.

"I'll probably get in trouble for this, but to not say something would be immoral," tweeted Nikole Hannah-Jones, who recently won the Times a Pulitzer for her 1619 project. "As a black woman, as a journalist, as an American, I am deeply ashamed that we ran this."

SOURCE