Eugene David<br>...The One-Minute Pundit

Posted 5:37 PM by Gene

I wish I could have remebered that: Mickey notes that the IDIOT TIMESMAN who wrote that craven valentine last week for JACK! is married to A SONY PICTURES EXECUTIVE. This is at the LEAST the worst kind of conflict of interest a news hack can commit, because he's clearly doing a favor for a very powerful man -- and for his wife in the deal.

OR:

Suppose a New York Times reporter were married to the owner of a major league baseball team. Would the Times let that reporter cover the Commissioner of Baseball? Or suppose a Times reporter were married to the head of a major drug company. Would that person get to cover the pharmaceutical industry's trade association, the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of American? Married to the chairman of General Motors and covering the Alliance of Automobile Manufacturers? It's a no-brainer--"appearance of conflict," prophylactic rule, open-and-shut.

HAS THE TIMES' PUBLIC EDITOR BURIED HIS HEAD IN THE SAND? WHERE ARE YOU, DAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAANIEL OOOOOOOOOOOOOOKRENT?!?!?!?!?

P. S. Mickey also tells us Jack doesn't have the respect of his bosses (you're telling us!) but is treated with "reverence" by THE REAL-LIFE CREW OF K STREET. (AS IF!) I think this is as good a time as any to test THE POWER OF BLOGGING.

P. P. S. Mr. Okrent's office is conspicuously absent from The Times' Member Center's Information and Services Directory.