The New York Times

I have written for the Times for ten years now, and, excited as I am about moving to Bloomberg, I am sad for my time there to be coming to an end.  It is the world’s greatest newspaper and probably will be for some time to come.  They also have treated me consistently well and always made me feel welcome, and were only nice and encouraging to me when I announced my departure.  I’ve had great and understanding editors in Tom Redburn and Jeff Sommer, Jeff for the last eight or so years of my writing for them.  I’ve been reading the Times for the last forty-four or so years of my life, since I was about ten, and I am not about to stop.  One further testament to the paper is that two of the main people from Bloomberg who recruited me had their background at…The New York Times.

Soon I’ll write a bit about Bloomberg and what I’ll be doing there.


Zero comments? Welcome to Bloomberg Professor and master Tyler C. Cowen!

Maybe because it's 2am?

Not in Philippines.

Ray lives in PH?

With his girlfriend half his age, but he said he would go to Greece to get an inheritance.

The last I read was that he went (or is currently in) Greece and is pilfering through some dead relative's property for loot, but he believes the Caretaker beat him to it.

Honestly, I always look forward to RL's stories. They're like a Marginal Revolution soap opera plot line.


Basically, an MR Telenovela. Friends who watch them tell me they are much more lurid (sex, money, crime, violence, etc.) than the American ones.

"(sex, money, crime, violence, etc.)"

I think we can check off all 4 of these with respect to Ray Lopez's stories.

The Brazilian ones are the best ones. I don't watch them, but they are higly praised and are watched in several dozens of countries around the world. If complaining letters sent to newspapers are good evidence, there are lots of sex and violence, I am not sure about money.

So Paul Romer and Tyler are both moving at the same time. A coincidence? I think not.

Does this mean you will be blogging less?

No change here! Thanks for asking, though.

'I have written for the Times for ten years now'

Really? The London Times? And no one knew?

This is below even your own loathsome trolling standards. My goodness try harder.

You forgot to log into your "dearieme" account

Yep, I think you nailed it. He's probably been the one trolling dearieme, but he just screwed up and outed his self.

Quitting one fiction factory. Beginning at another.

I'm also sad that you will no longer be writing for the New York Times. What is it that precludes you from writing for both the NYT and Bloomberg?

Wish you the best prof. Cowen.

everything is the best in the world in the US loool

Have you ever visited a country where "everything is not the best in the world"?

Argentina. Everything there is not the best in the world. Most things are not even good. The only best thing of the world there, on a second thought, is their northest neighbor.

So, Bolivia.

No! I meant Northeastern. Brazil.

If you like the Times so much why leave?

A preternatural resistance to mood affiliation?

I suppose Paul Krugman sucks all the oxygen from the room at the NYT. I read the Upshot (where Cowen's occasional columns appeared), but it's not the same as being top banana on the op/ed page. As for Bloomberg View, it's as diluted as the NYT is pure. Does Cowen actually believe he can compete with Megan McArdle for the adulation (and page views) of the typical Bloomberg reader? No, he can't. I still marvel at the career Ms. McArdle has built, from humble beginnings in dialogues with Jonathan Chait on, which I would watch just to see Chait's eye brows merge with the hair on top of his head when McArdle said something outlandish, to book author on the benefits of failure (The Upside of Down), a book that failed to mention the greatest failure of this century (the bankers' failure), to star "economics" contributor at Bloomberg View. What concerns me personally is that Cowen, with the volume of columns expected of contributors at Bloomberg View, won't have the time to offer up his reading list to readers of this blog. What should concern Cowen is that the demands of the volume of columns (and page views) expected of contributors at Bloomberg View will limit his time to digest the enormous volume of material that Cowen reads to be the unique blogger that he is (well, not quite unique, there's Mark Thoma), that Cowen will become more of an advocate for a particular view rather than a scholar with respect to all views related to economics. But nothing lasts forever. Except for blowhards.

What concerns me personally is that Cowen, with the volume of columns expected of contributors at Bloomberg View

Does BV have a set number that they expect from all columnists? I always assumed each columnist negotiated their own frequency--Matt Levine, for example, usually only posts once or twice a week (on top, of course, of his daily newsletter). is interesting, what with the alt-right randos who've appeared on it perhaps once over the years never to return again. Razib Khan, Jordan Bloom and Heather Mac Donald (most mainstream of the bunch) come to mind.

The Glenn Show is the best.

Referring to Heather MacDonald as an 'alt-right rando' is an indication you've never read a word by her.

She's appeared on Bloggingheads about 5x since 2005.

Bloggingheads is a crashing bore. RM Kaus abandoned the enterprise to Robert Wright, who has been increasingly unwilling or unable to recruit anyone you'd bother to listen to other than Harold Pollack, John McWhorter, and Glenn Loury. The only starboard figures (or pseudo-staboard figures) who've participated in recent years are a collection of pets and poseurs.

Well not only have I read her, but I contribute to a blog she's listed as contributing to (though she hasn't in a long time).

Yes yes, you're correct. She's not alt-right, though I suggested as much anyway.

You won on the internet.

"It is the world’s greatest newspaper" May I correct the typo? It is the world’s greyest newspaper (or grayest if you're American?).

It's so dreary that I'd rather read Le Monde, a true measure of desperation.

How about Matt Levine on Conversations with Tyler?

Well, sure, as long as there's no legal advice. (I'd love to see that one.)

This comment is not legal advice, but don't insider trade.

World's greatest newstpaper or world's greatest extension of the White House press secretary's office when the President is a Democrat?

Yuck Yuck Pravda on the Hudson!

I started reading the Times 50 years ago, when I was in high school. It was a great newspaper once, but not any more.

Make the New York Times Great Again?

People have been saying that since long before the Times was founded. And will be saying that long after its demise.

No, it was a satisfactory paper 35 years ago, will all sorts of foreign coverage you couldn't get to unless you could listen to BBC on shortwave. The one weak spot was the editorial page, which has always been stylistically wretched (a 'pseudojudicious drone' in the words of one wag) and shot through with mediocre columnists. My local Gannett sheet, which selected columnists from the Syndicates' inventory, was better than the Times page. The Washington Post was recruiting and developing talented opinion mongers (Henry Mitchell, Richard Cohen, Edwin Yoder, George Will, Emmett Tyrell) while the Times was serving their readers refuse from the likes of Anthony Lewis and Tom Wicker (later supplemented with more refuse from Anna Quindlen).

I find that Breitbart tells me everything I need to know about the World

Thankfully, you don't need to know much or have accurate information.

You funny :)

When I first saw the Leslie Jones tweets, I thought it was bad, but bad in the sense of lonely Twitter trolls, with nothing to do but abuse random people.

It got worse, right?

A bad day to endorse Breitbart

Feature, not a bug to this crowd.

Someone said something mean on the internet? I had no idea that was even possible!

It is more than someone saying something mean. It is about Gresham's law and democracy.

Alright, ill bite, how is this about Gresham’s law and democracy?

It is the world’s greatest newspaper and probably will be for some time to come.

Half a generation ago, Camille Paglia offered that the conception of The New York Times as the 'paper of record' was 'twenty years out of date'. Its days as a satisfactory newspaper came to an end within a half-dozen years of A.M. Rosenthal's retirement, around the time junior Sulzberger was appointed publisher. It has for two decades been simply one more manifestation of the nexus of interest and sentiment which makes use of the Democratic Party as an electoral vehicle. Just about anyone not a partisan Democrat who reads the paper understands this. Except Tyler Cowen.

"Just about anyone not a partisan Democrat who reads the paper understands this. "

Yep. I've got friends who are Progressives (but not partisan Democrats) that readily admit it. I suspect most partisan Democrats would privately admit that the NYT's is obviously biased in their favor, but it's part of their collective public position to deny the obvious.

It's like the Clinton vs Trump conundrum. There are numerous vocal voices on the mainstream Right willing to admit that Trump is a carnival barker and is either, a barely acceptable or a not acceptable candidate. But few voices on the Left are willing to harshly criticize Clinton (a person that's come closer to being indicted than any living Presidential nominee).

I understand the position from the Left that a flawed Clinton is better than Trump. I don't agree with the result, but it's a logical position. However, the default partisan Left position, seems to be that Clinton committed a minor infraction and this is all a Right Wing witch hunt. That's just a denial of reality.

"few voices on the Left are willing to harshly criticize Clinton"

Try talking to some Sanders supporters; there's plenty of harsh criticism and statements that they will not support her.

That is true to some extent. However, since Sanders has endorsed Clinton and pushed the narrative that her email server issues were trivial, I can't give much credit to this. For the most part, Democrats are quickly falling in line. Sanders stayed in the campaign about 3 weeks longer than Clinton did against Obama in 2008.

Prominent Republicans politicians have refused to endorse Trump. George Will left the party over Trump. There is no corresponding high level rebuttal to Hillary Clinton.

I have read Brazilian writers from the 1930's mentioning the NYT as a Democratic Party newspaper-- a (admittedly better written) counterpart of the higly partisan Brazilian newspapers of their time. It is not exactly a new development.

"There is no corresponding high level rebuttal to Hillary Clinton."

Trump is probably farther from mainstream Republicans than eternal hopeful Clinton is from mainstream Democrats (to be frank, again for better of worse, Sanders seems the real anomaly here). Anyone who waited until now to leave the party on account of Mrs. Clinton was not paying attention.

"Trump is probably farther from mainstream Republicans than eternal hopeful Clinton is from mainstream Democrats (to be frank, again for better of worse, Sanders seems the real anomaly here). Anyone who waited until now to leave the party on account of Mrs. Clinton was not paying attention."

Yes, those are good points.

It was merchanted a long time ago.

I don't think it's possible for any media organization to be the "paper of record" in the way people once used this term, but if you had to give this trophy to somebody I'd say wikipedia. It's certainly not the NY Times. Judith Miller, sitting on the NSA spying story, Snowden, blah blah. One might describe them as the imperfect keepers of an older tradition of journalism, I suppose.

Yep, "Worlds greatest left-leaning newspaper" would be more accurate. To be fair, on topics that have no political ramification, they often publish very good stuff. The problem is that in these benighted times, EVERYTHING has a political ramification, down to the recipe for shrimp scampi (is that shrimp sustainably caught? Is the recipe a cultural appropriation?)

And in particular everything in the NYT has a political ramification. Even the frigging mini-crossword is political. A recent clue was "campaigner for Clinton" or some such. Answer was "Obama". It was just like product placement in the movies: I was enjoying the entertainment, and then they drop that in to manipulate me into buying their product. Yuck.

" It is the world’s greatest newspaper and probably will be for some time to come. "
Sick neg bro.


Why do I get the feeling that this website only has about 5 commentators but each one of them has dozens of accounts?

Oh come now. That would be like 60 different posters. That seems a stretch. ;)

On Saturdays I have the choice of the NYT, the WSJ and the FT. Somehow, it's always the FT.

Their editorial pages demonstrate The New York Times is not part of civilized discourse.

NYT the world's greatest newspaper? Walter Duranty would agree.

BTW, here's a link to a conversation between Tom Brokaw and Charlie Rose (hardly members of the "vast right wing conspiracy") discussing the state of the media. Brokaw says that, in February, 2001, he attended a press conference by Senators Hart and Rudman on the emerging terrorist threat. Brokaw states that the NYT "walked out of the press conference" (it's at about the 2:20 mark). Guess that news wasn't fit to print.

I don't know what you'll be doing at Bloomberg, but I know you won't be drinking big sodas.

Il est toujours amusant de voir des Américains monoglottes glorifier la supériorité de leurs journaux sur ceux écrits dans les cinq mille neuf cent quatre-vingt-dix-neuf autres langues de notre planète. Si je comprends bien le New York Times est l'avatar moderne destiné aux métrosexuels new-yorkais de la regrettée Правда, hors de laquelle il n'était point de salut. [Free translation: the provincial belief that the NYT is better than any other newspaper for some phantasmagorical total ordering of all newpapers in the world is beyond grotesque]

Congratulations!!! I find myself increasingly gravitating towards Bloomberg these days. I like the charts, original photography, consise articles, weird 501 error page and headlines! I know it is a loss leader to their terminals but it is a great service to American journalism and global business. However, I can think of some faults. Some longer investigative journalism would be nice. Endless articles about Uber and first class cabins can get tiresome. Most of all the opinions pages seem (very) weak. Where are the subject experts? Project Syndicate is very good at this on a small budget...... I assume this is why they called you. One feature that keeps me coming back to the FT each week is the lunch. Surely there is no one more qualified than you to host a weekly Breakfast with Bloomberg?

I anxiously await the first posting on banning semi-automatic guns and magazines over 10 rounds.

Seriously, your contract says you have to write those, right?

Comments for this post are closed