Shafer even promises that if Slate wins a People's Choice award, he'll insult the whole event from the podium. So, er, go vote for him.

There's no evidence that the order came from Conde Nast bigwigs, who are generally relaxed about inter-title criticism; and Gladwell wrote us in an email that he hadn't asked for the post's removal. "No idea what you're talking about I'm afraid," said Gladwell. "Bercovici wrote about me?" But the embattled Lipman, unpopular among her own staff, depends on the goodwill of Newhouse. The most plausible explanation for the deletion: Lipman pre-emptively ordered the removal of the post to save Gladwell, the New Yorker and Conde Nast, from embarrassment. How collegial! Except, by deleting an item which would otherwise have been unremarked, Portfolio's succeeded only in drawing the attention of Slate's eagle-eyed Jack Shafer, and various blogs like this one. And the original post still remains, like a rebuke, in Google's cache of the Portfolio site. Here's the original article and, below, the page as it now appears.

Shafer devotes thousands of words and dozens of Nexis searches to Gladwell's tall tale, which turns out to be quite tall. In the story, Gladwell claimed to have been put on prohibition at the Post, which no one at the paper can remember. William Booth, Gladwell's former colleague at the Post and Billy in the story, denies there ever being a "perverse and often baffling" contest. Many of the articles that Gladwell cites never actually ran in the paper.

Shafer also agrees that it was lame of Gladwell and This American Life to encourage listeners to believe the story was true, so ha, Pareene. Shafer, Malcolm Gladwell and This American Life host Ira Glass, all media people I adore, have thoughts on this pet topic of mine. Now I can relate to what Gladwell said in the Moth story about his first mistake at the paper, which incidentally, was a fib: "All of a sudden there is a little glimmer, and I can begin to see that there is some hope in this profession and this thing that didn't make sense to me is now kind of making sense." [Slate]

Reign of Error [Slate]

Peter Kann, former Dow Jones chairman and CEO, sent a letter to the Bancroft family praising them for opposing the bid. His rationale: "I thought it is important for some of us who believe in the independence of the company to thank the Bancrofts and the Ottaways for what they are doing, and maybe to try to provide some more support for the positions they are taking."

In TV Week, Fox News architect and Murdoch confidant Roger Ailes says don't bet against the boss: "I've never seen him not want to win. There's no reason to believe he's going to take business news lightly. He sets a pretty high bar and people generally underestimate him in a kind of strange way. They say, 'Well, a business channel,' and then suddenly he makes a play for Dow Jones. He's full of surprises, and it shows everybody he's fully engaged and intends to win." Ailes does note, however, that ""If the family elects not to sell it, it's not going to happen." (Via TVNewser.)

Finally, in Slate, Jack Shafer predicts that Murdoch won't destroy the paper, but will remake enough of it to turn it into a very different publication, one for which top journalists won't want to write and Jack Shafer won't want to read. Again: harsh words!

Yesterday: Episode V: Darth Murdoch Plays The Press

It gives a writer all the indemnification he needs against charges that he's fabricated. Made-up dialogue? It's an exaggeration. A made-up scene? It's just an embellishment. An altered setting? Hyperbole!

All true, and a fair point. Because when you're reading a humorist—even one of Sedaris' "easy-listening for self-satisfied liberals" caliber—you expect everything to be completely above board, right? If Jack really has an issue with this (and he must have, to ratchet up the dudgeon to 11 on one of the least interesting scandals of the age), a better place to take it up is with the editors and the sales departments at the publishing houses who decide, from the very beginning, where a book will end up being shelved. Their mission isn't to ascertain truth—that would require editors who edit. Instead it's to figure out where people will most likely be looking for the book. In "Fiction"? Who goes back there? Old cat ladies and goths, mostly.

In an ideal world Barnes & Noble would have a huge section in the front labeled "Bullshit," but as we are so often reminded, we do not live in an ideal world. We live in a world where David Sedaris is considered a first-tier humorist. —balk

David Sedaris and His Defenders [Slate]

Daniel Radosh brings up the Rodney Rothman case as a counter-point, and it does raise some interesting questions about the New Yorker's standards. (Rothman offers his own thoughts in the comments.) Our feeling is that Rothman took the hard fall because his name was mostly unfamiliar to readers, who did not have the same expectations that some elements of his story might be the kind of bullshit for which anyone with any common sense knows he or she should arrive at a David Sedaris piece fully prepared.

In no particular order:

Sewell Chan: Sure, he already works for the paper, but he could do this job in his sleep, which we imagine occurs between the minutes of 5:43 and 5:44 A.M. Honestly he'd probably nail CEO Janet Robinson's scalp to a wall while just wandering around asking questions.

Brian Montopoli: Nonstopoli, the boy wonder of CBS Public Eye and also of the neighborhood of Cobble Hill, is a stellar choice. His context-free ploddings are the perfect solution for editors worried about invasive public editors who ask questions. Plus, he'll never let the web journal go un-updated—even when he has nothing to say he makes sure to tell you. A fine choice for those who are worried about a public editor with too little self-esteem.

Rachel Sklar: This perky Canadian calls them like she sees them. Tough but fair, Sklar made her bones in the trenches of Mediabistro, then took The Huffington Post by storm, birthing Eat the Press, a website that combines the humorless media scolding of Columbia Journalism Review with incessant show tune references. This is the ombudsman—nay, ombudsperson—who will always see the other side of any argument.

Ira Stoll: Well, he invented Times-blogging, to be sure. Also, will make sure he catches all those pesky moments when the Times refers to Palestinians as human beings.

Rachel Marsden: Once this Fox babe starts following something, she doesn't quit!

Jesse Oxfeld: We placed the former Gawker editor on this list because it must be killing him to see Spiers' name put forth for the gig. Also, pretty much every Times article makes us say "Oy!" and it would be great to see that sentiment acknowledged in the paper itself. Is always willing to go boldly to press with his original thesis untarnished by any sort of later-forthcoming information.

Maer Roshan: The serial Radar reviver has worked at every magazine that matters in this town. He knows where the bodies are buried. Even better, he has plenty of experience with projects that last for a year or less. The only downside with this choice is the whole "under 40" thing.

Byron "Dan" Worthington III: We know for a fact that the Gawker ombudsman would love to leave Gawker as soon as humanly possible. He promises he will go easy on Times reporters in every case brought before him. You know, just like Calame. Drop him a line, Keller, he wants out.

******
Your nominations? Send them to slate.pressbox@gmail.com, because we really don't give a shit. —balk

The Next Times Public Editor [Slate]

As a long-time magazine and newspaper editor, I'd have no trouble firing McEwan for writing as he did if he worked for me ... But McEwan's defenders mustn't judge him by the rules of mere journalism. He links to his champions on his home page, where his own explanation can be found. The defense goes like this: He's a novelist, operating in a world of make-believe, and storytellers have always been allowed to pilfer and pinch from other writers with impunity.

He offers this zinger as proof:

If McEwan really did nothing out of the ordinary, the authors campaigning for him would do him a great service to note the passages in their own books that rooked from historical sources in a similar manner. Don't hold your breath.

Gawker Media polls require Javascript; if you're viewing this in an RSS reader, click through to view in your Javascript-enabled web browser.

Ian McEwan Did Nothing Wrong, Say the Big-Shot Novelists [Slate]

• Guy who told Murdoch to buy MySpace quits. [Guardian]
  
• Private equity firms love them some media conglomerates. Latest example: ClearChannel, the company that has spent the last decade making sure radio sucks, which was snapped up for a kajillion dollars yesterday. [NYT]
  
• Energetic new media entrepreneur out at AOL. [Valleywag]
  
• WSJ employees will not be allowed to wear shorts no matter how much they piss and moan about it. [NYP]
  
• Those who aren't getting fired by NBC are leaving voluntarily. [NYT]
  
• Marketwatch rewrites Jack Shafer's Digg story a scant five months later. [Marketwatch]
  
• Dave Zinczenko, whose name will forever be associated with subpar oral sex, rides the Borat wave. [NYP]
  
• The English: "paedophiles, drunkards and hooligans." Sorry, this is news to whom? [Guardian]
  
• Why can't the Times be fun like the Drudge Report? If you guessed Jon Friedman, you read this feature way too often. [Marketwatch]

• Bill Keller, everyone he knows, disagrees with NYT ombudsman (sorry, "Public Editor") Byron "Barney" Calame on banking story. [NYT]
  
• If you bought today's newspaper you're a sucker, says Jack Shafer. [Slate]
  
• Dave Zinczenko slammed by Graydon Carter; told the "dead Art Cooper" anecdote once too often. [Radar]
  
• Fox News having a hard time with this whole election thing. [TVNewser]
  
• "Smarter, sharper" Marie Claire selling pretty much the way you'd expect a "smart, sharp" woman's magazine to sell. [WWD]
  
• Donald Trump likes his own name. [Copyranter]
  
• MySpace offends Germans' delicate sense of order. [NYT]
  
• FCC somehow conned into believing an interview with a Survivor contestant is actually "news." [B&C]
  
• Reality TV producer doesn't exactly deny being a ""scum-smeared zombie with the brainpower of a blood orange and the imagination of a bin." [Guardian]

The topic du jour is the death of the newspaper (again), and Shafer is tired of hearing journalists complaining about staff cuts. On Monday, he wrote a column about how journalists overstate their value to society, and pointed out that newspapers often don't do their own investigations. Wednesday, he wrote another column, this time about how journalists overstate their value to society, and pointed out that newspapers often don't do their own investigations.

Shafer does give us this entertaining nugget though.

Scratch a serious reporter, and he'll offer volumes about the "public service" his newspaper performs in the form of investigations: It watchdogs government. It keeps corporations honest. It uncovers the dastardly deeds of foreign dictators and prevents genocide. It exposes quacks and charlatans. (It turns the common man into a Socrates if he reads the editorials!)

Newspaper people have enormous egos, if you get my drift, and don't mind massaging the big hairy things in public.

The Observer's well-deserved reputation as the top farm team for New York journalism must die. If you want Kaplan to teach journalism, give him cab fare to the Columbia J-school. If you want him to run a newspaper, spend more money on talent so he can fully exploit the bright young things he's developed. Establish the Observer as a paper where you can build a career, not just start one.

Hey, Jack, you might as well send the memo directly to Donald Graham; you think he's actually bothering to parse this stuff?

So, You Bought the New York Observer [Slate]

How the New York Times Makes Local Papers Dumber [Slate]

The Best Writers at the New York Times [Slate]

The killer whale, is one of the most intelligent creatures in the universe. Incredibly, he is the only animal other than man who kills for revenge.

He has one mate, and if she is harmed by man, he will hunt down that person with a relentless, terrible vengeance — across seas, across time, across all obstacles.

How To Write a Hit Article [Slate]

Nick Denton, Publicity Cat [Slate]

Keller, pictured above, has declined to talk about the muted backstory for now and is practically telling everyone within earshot, "I'm not gonna pay a lot for this muffler!"

We'll leave the ethical debate to the pros but sweet chryst, sitting on a story for over a year?!? We can't keep a secret for longer than five minutes. All of this is to say we can't believe we sat on this scoop after the jump for over a day.

Hi There,

I wanted to let Gawker know that Nelly is having a surprise after party on New Years Eve at PM Lounge in the Meatpacking District. He is performing at MTV and then is going to PM right after. My friend works there and they have reserved 8 bottles of Cristal for him. They have the two main tables reserved for him and they won't sell them even though the place is almost sold out. Supposedly it's gonna be off the hook. I love Gawker so I wanted to contribute this inside scoop.

Happy New Year!

Let freedom ring.

More Sympathy for Bill Keller [Slate]
Sympathy for Bill Keller [Slate]

Then this headline appeared on Slate last night:

Really, we do so hate to say told you so.

Earlier: Could Google Be Jumping the Shark?