The Roberts appointment was astonishing for the Times-and a sign that publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., only two years in that position, was willing again to shake up his tradition-bound property. While Roberts had once served as national editor at the paper, leaving in 1972, he was still an outsider-and the first named to such a high Times position since 1904. What did it mean? Most saw it as a frank acknowledgment that the Times, while still the nation’s best newspaper on most days, was moving to correct the exact drift that Roberts himself spoke about. As media critic Ken Auletta put it: “At a time when journalism is becoming more tabloidy, The New York Times is straightening its shoulders and saying, ‘We’re going the other way’.”
That wasn’t the only factor in tapping Roberts. It also signaled that other contenders weren’t ready for the job; Roberts’s fixed, three-year appointment will likely set off a period of fierce jockeying (chart). Roberts, whose Columbo-like, disheveled personality has endeared reporters for decades-he once set his desk on fire with a cigarette -is likely to help morale.
In an interview last week, Roberts made it clear he wasn’t including the Times in his speech. “The Times is very much a substantive, central newspaper and it remains strongly committed to becoming even more essential and even more committed to quality,” said Roberts.
Lelyveld, a son of a rabbi, had the inside track on the top job for several years. A Pulitzer Prize-winning journalist whose brilliance is noted as frequently as his shyness, Lelyveld possesses solid hard-news credentials. He’s reported from a variety of spots, including the Congo, India, Hong Kong and South Africa. He has referred to Roberts as a mentor and should benefit from his presence.
Frankel leaves with generally high marks. Under Sulzberger’s hand, he worked to remake the “good gray lady” (a term now verboten inside the Times) into a hipper, younger, more accessible paper. He widened the definition of news running front-page stories on everyday concerns, like weight and short skirts. He expanded coverage of the city and its minorities.
This upset critics who contend that Frankel let the pendulum swing too far. “The Times may have gotten a little lost in its search for a user-friendly format,” says Edwin Diamond, author of “Behind the Times.” In allowing reporters more analytical leeway, critics say, the paper has at times lowered its standards. The paper’s “Q-heads”-news analysis-too often became thinly disguised, but never dowdy, opinion pieces. Lelyveld isn’t worried; it wouldn’t be the Times if the rest of the trade weren’t carping about his paper.
Retiring Executive Editor
Cerebral and decent, he took over the fractured city room in 1986 and changed the definition of news -trends in medicine, science, education belonged on page one. His staff rediscovered city stories and, at last, ran a good sports page.
Executive Editor
A lifer at the Times, he first starred as an uncommonly graceful writer on the city desk, then did stints in Africa, London, Asia. He won a Pulitzer for a book on South Africa, then began climbing the slippery ladder on 43d Street.
Managing Editor
Brilliantly covered the civil rights movement for the Times became national editor, then jumped to The Philadelphia Inquirer in 1972. Loved in his newsroom, where he gave reporters endless time for major projects.
Who succeeds Roberts, and then Lelyveld? They haven’t yet warmed their chairs, but the talk has begun. The contenders:
First black assistant managing editor. Former White House correspondent, excellent Metro editor, effective office pol. Problem: no Pulitzer.
Editorial-page editor, ex-Washington-bureau-chief Author of splendid oral history of the civil-rights movement. Problem: wears his fly-fishing on his sleeve.
Went from fine family columnist to another voice on op-ed page. Problem: no managerial record, but she’s raising kids, so presumably could run a city room.
