Sunday, August 15, 2010

Martin Bernheimer is 100% Right

Read Martin Bernheimer's comments on what a newspaper should do when an outside entity demands the firing, demotion, or reassignment of a critic.


John Marcher said...

That is indeed a great piece by Bernheimer and another entertaining round of ACD turning the comments section of another into his own platform while not allowing comments on his own.

Hmm, I sense a distant parallel in there somehwere, but it's probably best not to think too much about it.

Joe Barron said...

Very good summaries of the issue.

But, you know, this kind of thing has been going on forever. To a large extent, the outcome depends on whether a paper's editors decide to back their writer. Back in the 1920s, Alexander Woollcott was banned from the Shubert theaters, but the New York Times, which in those days wasn't nearly as powerful as it is today, sued the Shuberts on his behalf. The Times lost the case but eventually won the war: As a result of the publicity, Woollcott became something of a hero, and later was quietly allowed to return to the theaters. And he got a byline out of the affair --- a rare privilege for a Times critic in those days.

I do hope Don finds another gig, though in today's job climate, that's doubtful. The reassignment was a calculated humiliation.

Henry Holland said...

If Donald Rosenberg were to be hired as the chief classical music of the Los Angeles Times, I'd be ecstatic. (see also: Tim Mangan)

Instead, we're stuck with Mark Swed, who operates in an almost anti-Rosenberg v. FW-M way: he's more a program note writer and cheerleader than anything. After growing up reading Martin Bernheimer, what a comedown to have Swed!