Improve the New York Times: re-arrange pages!

Times' editors wanted to make me angry this morning with this on the front page.  How phony and infuriating  for this "opinion-making" newspaper to herald McNamara's death with "Architect of Futile War."  That's what they write now...What did they learn as their editors learn from Vietnam as they waltzed their important readers into support for invading Iraq?

Not till page 18, was the page that should have been on the front.  Emma Shulman, an inspirational old lady whose comments and lifestyle could make all ages pause.  Notice that Ralph Blumenthal's color photo in the online edition is even better than the black/white.  Who decided?

Finally, Bob Herbert's column, "After the War Was Over" (have to wait till Op-Eds, page 23), belonged alongside the McNamara one.  I could continue by re-arranging the other sections but have to get into the shower.

Why haven't they asked me how to improve the Times?

Comments

[m.e.]

genius!! what a great idea this is. thanks for doing it for us--else we'd have to read the doggone rag ourselves.

[donna]

"Why haven't they asked me how to improve the Times?"

Because they don't really care what their readers think -- which is the entire problem.

Just like television networks think right now we all want to watch MJ's funeral. Bleah.

[Hattie]

They keep saying, "You have to read us. It's your duty!" It's insulting.
I read a book review of a book that the reviewer thought was good, downloaded the book, read it, and felt throughly insulted that this trash should be so highly praised. They used to get away with this stuff, but now we have other sources from people who don't go to each other's parties, so to speak. Next time I'll look at the Amazon reviews before I waste my money on a book their reviewers claim to like.