1. His Name is No, Dr. No - Some hippie was once so enthralled by his resistance to the word "yes" that s/he sent him a giant "NO" in gratitude. He loves it so.

2. "Effective Nuisance" - That's going on his business card STAT!

3. Healthcare is His Thermopylae -

Mr. Coburn is preparing for what he considers a career pinnacle of havoc. Enacting the proposal, he says, would be catastrophic, and so if precedent holds, he will try to hinder it with every annoying tool in his arsenal: filing amendments (he has done that 508 times since joining the Senate, second only to John McCain's 542 in that period), undertaking filibusters and objecting strenuously.

And that fucking poseur Joe Lieberman can kiss his ass.

4. Friendship Means Paying off Your Friend's Mistress - And then ripping said friend a new one for being such a sick cheating cheaty bastard. Hey! Where do you think you're going, Ensign? Take your public shaming like a man!

5. The Correct Way to Treat Water Moccasins is to Behead Them - It's what Jesus should have done.

To the Staff:

When we wrote to you last week, we encouraged you to come forward by Friday to make voluntary contributions of CET days or temporary pay reductions at this difficult economic time for the IHT. Since then we have met with you twice in groups and in many individual sessions. We appreciate the response from the many people who have come forward with contributions, either involving a salary reduction or the donation of CET days, which now tally more than 60. That is already a worthwhile contribution, given that we are told that one day of CET from each person on the newsroom payroll would be worth a total of some 23,500 euros. All this serves — on top of the previously instituted reduction of CET days — as an expression of the Paris newsroom's willingness to stand by the IHT and help it financially. It also more evenly balances the salary cutbacks experienced in different offices of the IHT and The Times, which were shaped by varying laws, contracts and procedures across three continents. These voluntary contributions by the Paris staff exemplify what Bill Keller referred to in a newsroom talk at The Times Wednesday as the "spirit of shared sacrifice" reflected in the Newspaper Guild's overwhelming approval of temporary pay cuts of 5 percent covering hundreds of its members.

We appreciate as well your thoughtful questions and comments as you wrestle with the decision of what, if anything, to contribute. We want to emphasize that this decision is a personal one, shaped by individual circumstances and determinations, and that there is no single right answer. One factor that many of you have asked about is the nature of the eight layoffs proposed in Paris. Without knowing which departments they come from and how they might affect the newsroom, several of you have said, it is hard to know how to come to your best judgment. We are in the formal process of consultation with the comite d'enterprise, and for now that is all that can be said. In the meantime, we will extend the period for making voluntary contributions so that you can weigh everything and make your most reasoned decisions. Meanwhile, we welcome a continuing dialogue. Please contact either of us or Tom Redburn with any questions or simply to talk things through. And thanks, again, for considering this request after a year in which you have risen to the occasion — journalistically and in many other ways — time and again.

Marty and Alison

"The banker suit is definitely dead," said Euan Rellie, an investment banker in New York.

Or you could say it like this:

"The banker suit is definitely dead," said Euan Rellie, an investment banker in New York and husband of socialite Lucy Sykes and guy that Colman has quoted on fashion four times in the past four years.

Euan Rellie is the most fashionable man in the world.
[Erik Maza. Pic via]

Voicemail is the old thing you push your phone buttons for to hear old voices from old people who leave you old messages about old things. Not very effective in your fast-paced youth lifestyle, is it? Well if you feel this way, join the big youthful club, okay. A Times freelancer has tracked down a bunch of people who share this opinion—probably by using fast-paced youth-friendly internet technology!

"If you left a message, I have to dial in, dial in my code," Ms. Cheong said. "Then I mess up and redial. Then once I hear the message, I need the phone number. I try to write it down, and then I have to rewind the message to hear it again," she added, feigning exhaustion.

I feel the same way! It seems that I'm not alone—everyone in my generation hates voices and loves "text," because we have seen our souls melted into goop and our entire selves transformed into antisocial swamp creatures by the internet's deadening glow. And I thought I was all alone. Thanks, fake NYT trend story of the week! Txt me! [NYT]

The rumor we heard yesterday about King magazine folding has been confirmed. You'll have to get your ass elsewhere, gentlemen.


Multiple sources tell us that 20 or more employees were laid off at Conde Nast Digital today. Designers and product management types were among the casualties. The Conde crumble continues. Also, a tipster tells us that the Boston Globe laid off four full-time union employees this week, all of whom were women, they say. And we hear that yesterday's Forbes layoffs actually stretched into today, because the company couldn't get to everyone yesterday. Harsh.


Bill Keller is getting salty! The NYT editor wrote Vanity Fair a kind of pissy letter dismissing its recent piece on Pinch Sulzberger. "I'll bet on Arthur Sulzberger finding the answer to that question [of journalism making money] before Mark Bowden does," Keller wrote. Zing! We must admit, we do like Bill Keller. He's a feisty one.


Oh hell, those two poor Current TV journalists who got caught sneaking into North Korea are now facing up to 10 years in prison there, according to the wacky NK government. Good lord. If that's not a bluff, it's time for some Rambo.


The list of Pulitzer Prize finalists hasn't leaked this year as usual, probably because everybody in newspapers is too sad to care much.

Dear Colleagues,

As you know, the global economic crisis is taking its toll on a broad range of businesses and sectors, here in the U.S. and around the world. We have reported in our own newspapers and on our own Web sites that the economy is likely to continue struggling throughout this year and possibly longer.

Given this economic outlook and the changes occurring in the media business, we, regrettably, must take even more steps to lower costs. We have been, and continue to, reorganize and reduce our staff, which means we are saying goodbye to many of our close colleagues. Now, in addition, we are lowering salaries through the end of this year for all remaining nonunion employees and, in exchange, providing additional time off. We plan to approach the Newspaper Guild in New York to ask for its participation in the program and to continue working with our unions in Boston and our other locations on lowering our costs, including wage reductions.

The salaries of all employees at The New York Times Media Group (with the exception of the IHT, which is working on other cost reduction measures), The Boston Globe, Boston.com and Corporate in New York will be rolled back by 5%, starting this April, and these employees will receive 10 additional days off to use before the end of the year.
At the About Group, Baseline, Globe Direct, International Media Concepts, Regional Media Group, Shared Services Center and Worcester Telegram & Gazette, the approach is similar, with salaries being rolled back by 2.5% with five additional days off. We made the distinction between the two groups by taking into account location and other factors. Next year, we plan to return salaries to their current levels. Of course, such a decision depends on the state of our business.

Many of you will have questions about these actions. Your manager or department head has been briefed with more details and is your best source of information.

This was a very difficult decision to make. The environment we are in is the toughest we have seen in our years in business. Across our Company, you and your colleagues have worked hard to introduce innovative products and services, reduce expenses and improve productivity. We are deeply grateful for your efforts and proud of your achievements. As we take these painful steps together, we remain confident that our great Company will keep moving forward to better times.

Sincerely,

Arthur & Janet

The layoff memo:

Dear Colleagues,

In a note just distributed, Arthur and Janet informed us that the company, regrettably, must take even more aggressive steps to control our costs. Clearly, our course is not getting any easier. The recession, especially the deteriorating advertising climate, is exacting a bitter toll, despite all that we have already done to reduce spending.

This morning, we notified about 100 employees on the business side of The Times that their jobs were being eliminated. We thank these dedicated colleagues for all they have contributed to The Times over the years.

The broader announcement today outlines a temporary salary reduction for the remainder of the year for all non-union employees, including the top leadership of the company. It is our hope that these cost-cutting measures will allow us to avoid further layoffs.

The details of the salary reduction will be communicated to you shortly by your senior managers. Although employee pay will be cut by 5% for the remaining three-quarters of the year, you will be entitled to 10 additional personal days off over the nine months. Next year, we plan to return salaries to their current levels. Of course, such a decision depends on the state of our business.

In addition, we will be asking that our Guild-represented colleagues make a similar sacrifice. The Company plans to discuss this with the Guild leadership this afternoon, in a spirit of shared sacrifice and as a way to otherwise avoid layoffs in the newsroom.

Navigating this difficult passage for our business has not been easy. We need to do what we can to reduce spending in the face of falling revenues. At the same time, it is vital we do everything possible to maintain the quality and reach of the journalism that is the hallmark of The Times and to support the resourcefulness and competitive edge of the Media Group's business operations.

Decisions such as today's underscore the scale of the challenges facing us as we confront not only the structural changes reshaping our industry but also the deepening global recession.

We honor those who will no longer work alongside us and extend our gratitude to them for their contributions. Further, we want to thank every one of you who are sacrificing a portion of your pay over the remainder of the year.

Sincerely,

Scott, Bill, Martin & Andy

In her op-ed, Daphne Merkin cast the Madoff scam not as the evil actions of one man and a handful of credulous money managers who funneled billions to him, but as a natural result of people buying into Madoff's "mishpocha, [a sense of] of being part of an extended family." And everyone who lost money was not a "victim":

No one was holding a gun to anyone's head, saying sign up with Mr. Madoff or else...
(Although those who were duped are referred to in the press as "victims," it seems to me it would be more accurate to define them as casualties. Victims are specifically sought out; casualties are an indirect consequence of some larger action.)

Daphne Merkin's parenthetical disclosure in the piece said, in full: "I did not know Mr. Madoff nor did I invest with his firm, but have a sibling who did business with him."

Quite the understatement, Daphne! Her brother is J. Ezra Merkin, the fabulously wealthy money manager who reaped millions from clients by, as the Times says, "placing all of the investors' eggs in Mr. Madoff's basket and charging a hefty fee for doing so." Merkin earned 1.5% of investor's capital (minimum investment: $500K) for handing their money over to Madoff. His Ascot Partners fund lost "nearly all" of its $1.8 billion.

Now Ezra, who had "what is believed to be the world's biggest collection of Rothko paintings," has shuttered his fund, resigned as chairman of GMAC, gotten tons of bad press, and is waiting for the wave of investor lawsuits that's surely coming his way.

So it's not all that surprising his sister, a contributing writer to the New York Times Magazine, would try to do a little PR for him. Don't blame the big financiers, this thing is everyone's fault, hey! But it is pretty surprising the Times would allow such an obviously conflicted piece to be published with such a paltry disclosure. And the Public Editor agrees. A reader forwarded us this email they received from Clark Hoyt this morning:

Dear Reader:

Thank you for writing about the Daphne Merkin Op-Ed in Sunday's Times. I agree with you that the disclosure that Ms. Merkin's unnamed sibling "did business" with Bernard Madoff was completely inadequate. Given the degree of J. Ezra Merkin's involvement with Madoff, I think much more needed to be spelled out — including name, nature of the relationship and the subsequent lawsuits — so that readers could make up their own minds about whether any of it was relevant to Ms. Merkin's argument that Madoff's victims should be called casualties because they were eager to invest with him. Of course, they wouldn't have been eager to do so if they had known he was a swindler. And it has been reported that, in at least one case involving J. Ezra Merkin, his clients did not know that their funds were going ultimately to Madoff.

I have corresponded with Andrew Rosenthal, the editorial page editor of The Times, who agrees that there should have been greater disclosure. Mr. Rosenthal does not contemplate an editor's note. I am considering what I want to do about this.

Sincerely,

Clark Hoyt
Public Editor
The New York Times

Yesterday it was reported that WCBS anchor Steve Bartelstein had abruptly quit his job for unclear reasons. Now we know why, straight from Steve Bartelstein: "I'm leaving because I've been promoted several times, and yet, no raises, despite anchoring more hours then our noon and 6pm anchors. I'm leaving mainly because I'm waiting for a paycheck that this week is now a WEEK late." He's not sure if he's taking a break or out of the TV biz forever, but either way, he should still get his last check, yes?


A Singapore court has fined a WSJ editor $6,500 for "unwarranted attacks" on the Singapore Judiciary in editorials in the paper. Man, does the Singapore Judiciary suck a big donkey dick or what? USA.


Fantastico, US atty. general Eric "Marijuana is my middle name" Holder says that he is in fact open to the idea of jiggering with antitrust laws to help the dying newspaper industry, an idea championed by Nancy Pelosi as well as every newspaper owner in America. "I think that we need to have a healthy, vibrant newspaper industry, and I don't mean just online," Holder said, right after he said he loves to read the news "on my computer and iPhone and all that." Eric Holder is the problem and the solution.


One report puts the price that a private equity firm paid for the San Diego Union-Tribune as just "a little more" than $15 million. That's damn near nothing! Probably the reason that the CEO of the Washington Post is selling off millions of dollars worth of his stock in the company. But maybe all the rich people at Microsoft would like to buy the New York Times? "No,'' said Microsoft chief executive officer Steve Ballmer, outside the McGraw-Hill Building in Manhattan this morning. "Not ‘no comment.' No." Hey man, you could have said that in a nicer way.

Details editor Dan Peres had a little red meat for the crowd at his speech at Columbia J-school last night: "He called a neighbor in Westchester an 'asshole' after the man wondered aloud why anyone would pay j-school tuition... 'We'll be around a lot longer than his investment bank will,' said Mr. Peres." No comment. Whatsoever.


Sure, high school journalists like Josiah Jones of Lee's Summit, Missouri, know that the journalism industry is in rough shape, but "Jones plans to pursue a journalism career, completely undeterred by the forces buffeting the profession." Yea well millions of high school kids also plan on being NBA players and rock stars. The odds are against you, my friend.


Bad media news roundup: Media General is closing its DC bureau and laying off six journalists; NPR, of all places, is canceling all of its newspaper subscriptions; and a new report from Barclays Capital predicts that US advertising revenue will decline by 13% this year. Only three things, it's a good day!


NYT publisher Pinch Sulzberger: ""The immediate future looks, at a minimum, grim...Traditional revenue streams are anemic and getting worse." This is true. Though admirably direct, by NYT standards! He says the paper may start charging for some of its online content, which is inevitable.


See a family resemblance here? Eh? That's right, it's young AG Sulzberger, intrepid rookie NYT reporter and son of the man pictured above! The Observer reports he has the "attitude and presence of an intern." Buck up son! [Pic via]

After almost 150 years in business, the Rocky Mountain News is dead. It's the first major big-city paper to die in this new age of declining newspapers, but it won't be the last. It will publish its final edition tomorrow, leaving Denver with only one paper. Which, to be honest, is all that Denver could reasonably hope to support. Still, very sad for those folks who will go down with the ship. May they all go on to find more stable journalism jobs at...I don't even know.


The Pentagon will now allow the media to cover the homecoming of dead soldiers if the families agree, which seems like a fair idea. This marks a change from the Bush administration's official policy of "The dead who, now?"


The New York Times is cutting back the frequency of its T fashion magazine, from 15 to 12 issues per year. T is one of the paper's most successful and profitable products, but it depends on luxury advertising, which is now drying up. The downside of this: as we explained earlier, "T is one of the paper's most successful and profitable products."


A major part of the bankrupt Tribune Co.'s plan for turning its finances around was to sell its flagship skyscraper, the Tribune Tower in Chicago, along with the company's most coveted asset, the building's precious parking lot. But now they're giving up on that plan, because the economy sucks and nobody's buying huge buildings these days, so they'll have to come up with another way to help pay down the Tribune debt, which is so huge I can't even bring myself to say how huge it is. $13 billion.


The New York Times is shutting down four ad sales offices, laying off 27 ad employees, and leaving open 28 vacant positions. The internal memo:

A MESSAGE TO THE STAFF FROM DENISE WARREN AND ALEXIS BURYK

Dear Colleagues,

You are all aware of the challenges that we continue to face in these
rapidly changing and volatile economic times. Over the past year, we have
taken a series of cost-cutting measures to better align our expenses with
our revenues including a voluntary buyout, a freeze on excluded salaries,
as well as cuts in promotional spending and T&E.

Unfortunately, more must be done. This challenging business environment is
forcing us to make tough decisions that involve staff reductions. We have
made the extremely difficult decision to close the New Jersey, Long Island
and Westchester regional sales offices, and the Washington, DC national
sales office. Additionally, we have reduced a small number of sales
positions in New York.

As a result of our decision, we will reduce staff by 27 employees in the
advertising department. We have also gone dark on 28 open positions. All
employees who leave the Company as a result of this move will be given a
severance package and counseling.

Today and tomorrow we will say goodbye to colleagues we have worked with
and care about. It will be a difficult and emotional time for all of us.
We wish each of them well and we will work together to ensure the smoothest
possible transition for our customers. The suburban sales region will be
covered by our telesales department and the D.C. market will be handled out
of New York by the appropriate teams.

Though we will face challenges in our business moving forward, we will need
to continue to work together to weather this economic storm. We must now
focus our attention and energy on the future and the formidable challenges
we all face.

Thank you for your hard work and dedication. Together we can make a
difference and continue to build on our many achievements.

Sure, you want to teach your kids to eat healthy food. But some parents have little Johnny and Suzy running around scared of trans fats and sodium and who knows what else, to the point that they can't enjoy cookies etc. like a little kid should! Some parents are even starving their kids to death:

[A dietitian] recalled a mother who brought in her preteen, apparently bulimic daughter. As Ms. Setnick discovered, the girl was not trying to lose weight. "Her mother only served brown rice, but she didn't like it," Ms. Setnick said. "She did like white rice. And while I'm not going to tell anyone what they can bring into their own home, we discussed that when the family went out, it would be O.K. to get white rice."

When the girl told her mother what Ms. Setnick said, the mother was furious, according to Ms. Setnick. "She said, ‘Don't you know white rice is just like sugar?' "

Outrageous! Round up the pitchforks, handcuffs, feeding tubes, and bags of Cheetos—we're off to save some kids from nutty health food! Christ, it sounds like this is everywhere. I mean the Times didn't even have that compulsory graf buried somewhere halfway down in a trend story that slyly reveals the whole premise of the piece is made-up for maximum shock effect...oh, wait:

But even without firm numbers, anecdotal reports from specialists suggest that a preoccupation with avoiding "bad" foods is an issue for many young people who seek help.

Still, punch any granola-bearing parents just in case. [NYT. Pic via]

The Times ran this correction today:

An article on Jan. 28 about women who commiserated over dating Wall Street bankers caught in the financial crisis described a group they had formed, Dating a Banker Anonymous, as a support group. That is the name of their blog. Its creators originally told The Times that about 30 women had participated, but since publication, they have said that all involved were friends. Laney Crowell, one of the women who started the blog, said in the article that it was "very tongue in cheek;" she has since described it as a satire that embellishes true experiences for effect. Had the nature of the blog been made clear at the outset, the article would have described it accordingly, not as a support group.

Okay fine, so they were exaggerating on their blog for effect and they lied about the whole "support group" thing.

But guess what: they still went out looking for fame, spawned worldwide media knockoffs, and—most importantly—actually are living, breathing, sashaying symbols of the deadly effects that the financial boom had on sex and love in America.

So yea, maybe the Times should have been more skeptical. But no takebacks, ladies; that DABA girl mentality is way too real. [via Business Insider]

UPDATE: The origin of the NYT correction was apparently this Newsweek story yesterday. It doesn't make the DABA girls sound much better, though.

Keep in mind—both stories relied on anonymous sources, but logic would dictate that the WSJ spoke directly to Rupert Murdoch (their boss), while the NYT probably spoke to Peter Chernin.

NYT:

After deciding over the weekend to leave the company after 20 years, Mr. Chernin attended the Academy Awards Sunday night, where "Slumdog Millionaire," a film released by a unit of the News Corporation that he oversees, won best picture.

WSJ:

The company has been planning for Mr. Chernin's departure... Mr. Chernin's departure was finalized over the weekend while both he and Mr. Murdoch were in Los Angeles, according to people familiar with the matter. Mr. Chernin attended the Academy Awards, where "Slumdog Millionaire," a film from News Corp.'s Fox Searchlight Pictures, won the award for best picture of the year.

NYT:

The company said that when Mr. Chernin leaves upon the expiration of his contract on June 30, those Los Angeles-based units of the company will report to Mr. Murdoch.

WSJ:

News Corp. plans to streamline the management structure, and Mr. Chernin's exit is expected to give more responsibility to well-regarded entertainment executives, including James Gianopulos, Tom Rothman and Peter Rice. Mr. Murdoch is also expected to spend more time in Los Angeles, though he is already involved in the entertainment businesses and keeps an office down the hall from Mr. Chernin's on the Fox studio lot. ... Mr. Chernin tended to be the public face of key businesses, including News Corp.'s entertainment and digital-media businesses, and analysts had fretted about the effects of his possible departure. Mr. Murdoch said in his statement that News Corp. is "fortunate to have such a strong and seasoned group of leaders at our Fox companies, and we are confident that our success will continue.

NYT:

Mr. Chernin, who has been the News Corporation's president and chief operating officer since 1996, mainly oversaw the company's Los Angeles-based businesses, like the 20th Century Fox film studio and the Fox broadcast network. Mr. Chernin joined the company in 1989 as president of entertainment at the Fox Broadcasting Company, overseeing the production of shows like "The Simpsons" and "Beverly Hills 90210." In 1992, he moved to the film side and became chief executive of Fox Filmed Entertainment; the studio released "Titanic" under his watch. ... In Hollywood, Mr. Chernin has generally been regarded as one of a very small handful of executives - Robert A. Iger of the Walt Disney Company and Barry Meyer of Warner Brothers are two others - who excelled at both the internal dynamics and the rapidly changing economic prospects of the entertainment industry.

WSJ:

Mr. Chernin joined News Corp. in 1989 as president of entertainment at Fox Broadcasting and in 1992 became president and CEO of the Fox movie studio, a post he held until his promotion to his current position in 1996.

See, when you talk to the paper, your side gets better coverage, which is the only reason anyone ever talks to the paper about anything. [Reporters involved care to object? Email us]

• Don't say 'If you were offended...'—Or words to that effect. Which is what the Post did, essentially. People aren't all that smart, but they're smart enough to detect the inherent insincerity in this formulation: "Sorry you're so sensitive."
• Don't let the lawyers write it—Lawyers do nothing but cover your ass (and theirs). Apologies are simply not what they're made for. Vicki Iseman, McCain's lobbyist friend, is now pissed at the Times for issuing a lawyer-crafted note about the story, then immediately crowing to staff that they didn't apologize. So how can you ensure that your non-apology is satisfactory?
• Exhibit a thin, perceptible veneer of contrition—A good non-apology must allow both parties to salvage their own pride. This is done by using insincerity coated in a thin candy shell of contrition. Overly broad words help everyone swallow the thing. "I am sincerely sorry for this incident." Why are you sorry? Doesn't matter! Maybe because the other party is such a chump, who knows. But don't outright imply that, see? "We sincerely regret that this ever happened." You can apply these to any situation, almost!
• Let it be known QUIETLY that you had no reason to apologize—Don't just blast out a note to the whole world mocking your own non-apology as some legalistic bullshit. Just drop that fact very smoothly in the course of conversations with people who you feel should be made to understand that you're not guilty of whatever. You can even wink, in real life, as you do so!
• Both sides must tacitly agree to accept that they won—The recipient of the non-apology is entitled to walk away telling everyone that he was proven right. The giver of the non-apology is entitled not to have their face rubbed in it to the extent that they're tempted to be honest about how fake it was. It's like playing basketball with a child, and graciously letting them win. It's fine as long as they're a good sport. If they start getting too proud of themselves then you have you REJECT them, and then the crying starts, and it's all a big mess. Just learn to get along with your enemies, and save everyone a headache.

We sincerely regret that you had to read this entire post.

Slow magazine death news: According to a tipster (unconfirmed, as far as we can tell), Playboy "let 12-20 people go from their Chicago offices" yesterday. And Fishbowl NY says that Good Housekeeping had four layoffs today, and that Hearst in in the process of getting rid of its entire permalancer research staff.


The 138 year-old Tucson Citizen, an afternoon paper, is probably going to close next month because Gannett can't sell it, unsurprisingly. Tucson still has a morning paper, the Arizona Daily Star. The days of non-mega-cities having two newspapers are over, friends.


New idea: the Ford Foundation should buy the New York Times. Sure, throw it on the idea pile! Meanwhile, the head of the AP says that when the new service's content agreement with Google expires in December, he can "imagine content going behind a pay wall." Sure, throw it on the idea pile!

If you could keep only a few TV channels, what would they be? We'll tell you, America, by citing the results of a new survey! ABC, CBS, NBC, Fox, ESPN, Discovery Channel, History, Sci Fi Channel, HBO and Food Network, in order of preference. Nothing will make us give up According to Jim!


The last American non-journalist who is excited to meet a journalist is found working in an ice cream shop in Times Square.

Just a few months ago, the NYT Co's dividend was 23 cents per share. In November it was cut to six cents. And if you think about it, the reason it got cut that time is only more of a reason now:

"Today's decision provides the company with additional financial flexibility given the current economic environment and the uncertain business outlook," said Arthur Sulzberger, Jr., chairman, in a statement. "We expect the suspension of the dividend, coupled with our other actions, will help us decrease debt and improve the liquidity of the company, a difficult but prudent measure in this operating environment."

It's economically sound for the cash-strapped company, although it won't make the stockholders incredibly happy. Especially the Sulzberger family members who were living the easy life off that dividend money. Now their company actually has to make money in order for them to make money! Joe Hagan wrote in New York last fall:

Sulzberger and CEO Janet Robinson raised the dividend by an extraordinary 31 percent last year-even as the stock price declined. Of the $132 million a year the paper gives to shareholders, about $25 million of it now goes directly into the coffers of the Ochs-Sulzberger trusts.

That's all gone, and the company needs every penny it saves to pay down debt. Henry Blodget points out that a share of NYT stock is now cheaper than a Sunday copy of the paper. Time for the young Sulzbergers to get to work. At least one of them has a job. For now. [AP]

The Big Money analyzed the past three years of the NYT's rarefied wedding section, and—surprise—Brad, a structured finance analyst at Lehman Bros., is no longer so enthusiastic to propose to Melissa, a fashion PR specialist:

[In] our sample, around half of the grooms getting hitched in 2006-07 and 2007-08 were in finance, real estate, and insurance; media; and affiliated markets and industries like consultancies, luxury goods retail and promotion, and fundraising...

The bottom quickly fell out of both markets. From the end of October 2008 to this last weekend, only 36 percent (49 out of 137) of the grooms came from these fields, more than a 14 percentage-point drop.

The non-couple will not be honeymooning in St. Barts, nor residing thereafter on the Upper East Side. [Big Money]

The Times has an easy-jokey blog-bait story today about how, hey, I-bankers don't get no respect any more! Let's roll that killer quote:

“I’d almost rather say I’m a pornographer,” said a retired Wall Street executive who, for self-evident reasons, asked not to be identified. “At least that’s a business that people understand.”

Who knows what would happen to his personal and career life if people found out he was a Wall Street executive? And one who feels that people don't fully understand his industry, at that? Total ruin! [NYT]

It'll be a happy day when some reporter gets a job for a liberal politician and comes right out and says "Finally! All that 'fairness' shit was getting to me. Republicans are fucking morons." The high-profile journalists to join the new administration so far include Dr. Sanjay Gupta ("journalist," ahem, sort of) and former Time Washington chief Jay Carney, who's Joe Biden's new spokesman. And who can still barely bring himself to admit he's a Democrat:

“This is a Democratic administration; we’re obviously on that side of the aisle, but I don’t see this as a partisan job at all,” Mr. Carney said in an interview.

He acknowledged having “an affinity for Joe Biden and Barack Obama.” But he said it never influenced his coverage of the presidential campaign, as evidenced, he said, by the angry notes he often received from liberals last year concerning his coverage.

Jesus Christ Carney you're the spokesman for the Democratic VP. It is a partisan fucking job. Be proud of what you believe, for once! Douglas Frantz, former managing editor of the LA Times and investigative reporter, is now an investigator for John Kerry and the Foreign Relations Committee. "Pursuing the truth is apolitical," he says.

Sure it is, but figuring out which version of "the truth" wins is what politics is all about. Amazing how all these political reporters find that politics cease to exist once they get administration jobs! Dudes, the fact that you have opinions does not invalidate everything you ever did as a journalist. This angle of attack is tedious. Maybe, like David Brooks says, they're all secretly trying to get in there and make life hard for the really rich people, out of jealousy over the fact that even fancy reporters and government officials don't make enough to hire more than one live-in maid. Or maybe all these guys who have been 'framing' the political debate for the whole country for years and years really don't know what politics is all about.

Or, most likely, they're still scared of the "media liberal" tag, that was once a solid debate-ender. Well it's a new day, people. Everything is different now. You reporters are the lucky ones! You have jobs. You can revel in your liberalness. You're not some conservative hack like Rich Lowry or Tony Snow or Bill Kristol.

Be proud of who you are. [Pic via]