New addition to the NYT op-ed page: Bono.

[cali]

Yep, that's right, starting this Sunday Bono will be the newest addition to the op-ed line-up at the NYT. And that's according to Greg Mitchell, editor of Publisher and Editor.

http://www.dailykos.com/story/2009/1/9/1090/11755/425/681992

And here's the NYT press release:

Bono to Write New York Times Op-Ed Column
First in a Series of Occasional Op-Eds Will Appear on Sunday

NEW YORK--(BUSINESS WIRE)--Jan. 9, 2009--The New York Times announced today that Bono, the U2 lead singer and anti-poverty activist, has been invited to write a column for The New York Times. Beginning this Sunday, his columns will appear occasionally on The New York Times Op-Ed page and online at nytimes.com/opinion and will cover a broad range of subjects. He will also do a podcast of his first column.

"Bono is a great addition to our Op-Ed line-up," said Andrew Rosenthal, editorial page editor of The New York Times. "He is an extraordinary man who thinks deeply about his art and the major issues confronting the world. His writing will reflect that."

"What an honor," said Bono. "I've never been great with the full stops or commas. Let's see how far we can take this."

Bono has been a leader in the fight against AIDS and poverty in Africa since his initial involvement in the debt cancellation campaign of 1998, when he began lobbying governments across the G8 to free poor countries from odious debts so they could spend more on health and education. Since then, he has continued working on debt relief and trade reform while becoming a vocal advocate for global health. He has worked publicly and behind the scenes in the U.S. and Europe to help generate a global response to the AIDS emergency in Africa and for additional support to combat deaths from malaria and other preventable, treatable diseases.

Bono is the co-founder of ONE, a nonpartisan advocacy and campaigning organization backed by more than two million people dedicated to the fight against global poverty and disease. In 2005, Bono and ONE were key players in helping persuade the G8 nations to commit an additional $25 billion in effective assistance to Africa by 2010. Through his activism, he has travelled extensively to G8 and African capitals and worked directly with world leaders, as well as with influential religious and business leaders involved in anti-poverty campaigning.

<snip>

http://phx.corporate-ir.net/phoenix.zhtml?c=105317&p=irol-pressArticle&ID=1242538&highlight=

[gristy]

1. very good!

[ShadesOfGrey]

2. Cool. Can't wait to read his column! nt

[Subdivisions]

3. Possibly an effort to boost the bottom line. I read somewhere that

they could be about to default on a nearly half-billion dollar loan...

http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200901/new-york-times">Atlantic Monthly


Virtually all the predictions about the death of old media have assumed a comfortingly long time frame for the end of print—the moment when, amid a panoply of flashing lights, press conferences, and elegiac reminiscences, the newspaper presses stop rolling and news goes entirely digital. Most of these scenarios assume a gradual crossing-over, almost like the migration of dunes, as behaviors change, paradigms shift, and the digital future heaves fully into view. The thinking goes that the existing brands—The New York Times, The Washington Post, The Wall Street Journal—will be the ones making that transition, challenged but still dominant as sources of original reporting.

But what if the old media dies much more quickly? What if a hurricane comes along and obliterates the dunes entirely? Specifically, what if TheNew York Times goes out of business—like, this May?

It’s certainly plausible. Earnings reports released by the New York Times Company in October indicate that drastic measures will have to be taken over the next five months or the paper will default on some $400million in debt. With more than $1billion in debt already on the books, only $46million in cash reserves as of October, and no clear way to tap into the capital markets (the company’s debt was recently reduced to junk status), the paper’s future doesn’t look good.

“As part of our analysis of our uses of cash, we are evaluating future financing arrangements,” the Times Company announced blandly in October, referring to the crunch it will face in May. “Based on the conversations we have had with lenders, we expect that we will be able to manage our debt and credit obligations as they mature.” This prompted Henry Blodget, whose Web site, Silicon Alley Insider, has offered the smartest ongoing analysis of the company’s travails, to write: “‘We expect that we will be able to manage’? Translation: There’s a possibility that we won’t be able to manage.”

-snip-

[cali]

4. Maybe, but I can't see this helping.

[Kaleko]

5. It's a measure of how desperate the Bush-enablers are for eyeballs.

Yeah, the Times, they are a'changing,
now that it's too late.

[cali]

6. sigh. aside from the big Miller fuck up, the NYT has not enabled bush.

in fact, they've been the most outspoken outlet of the MSM against him. Now granted, the Miller mess was a big strike against them, but it's simply not true that the NYT has otherwise enabled bushco.