I couldn't agree more. My respect for the NYT is shaky and them letting Nate Silver leave while keeping the vacuous talking heads you named is just shameful.
It sounds like they made Nate an incredible offer and were willing to meet any of his demands. It sounds like they would have done anything to keep him.
Their offer to him was already grating to many others at the Times, I imagine. They offered him quite the little staff, and expansion into any topic he wanted.
I don't think his decision to leave was about their offer, that, or ESPN/ABC just dreamed bigger and gave him a bigger offer.
Either way, I'm psyched to see that he's getting brand separation and returning to his website along with a staff and the ability to write about whatever he wants.
I'm glad Nate walked. He was always a poor fit at the New York Times.
Actually Krugman is also a poor fit. I wish he'd walk away and just keep doing what he does independently. At least then I wouldn't have to go into privacy mode to read his articles.
Absolutely agree! Kurgman is a poor fit for any media outlet that tries to appeal to a mainstream audience. It is just saddening that such a brilliant academic mind now dedicates his life to partisan punditry.
Well, I love the concept of proto-Krugman as much as you, but nothing really keeps Krugman at NYT. He obviously enjoys the influence that punditry brings him over flexing his academic mind.
I am not sure if this is real influence or perceived influence. But it would be extremely interesting to get his personal take on his very own path towards punditry. In my opinion becoming just another shouting voice in the wind weakened his expert opinion that he previously had through his academic credentials. Previously quoting Krugman had at least some a general appeal, but today it is making a political statement.
Read this NiemanLab article from 2010. It was always clear (to me at least and a few others) that the NYT thing was just a step along the way (partnership vs acquisition - 3 yr contract, etc):
