NY Times Opinion Page, PBOM-Style 04/09/2010
Evan and I recently discussed how Ross Douthat is bringing fresh energy to a largely stale NY Times opinion page staff. We both deeply admire a lot of these people, and I realize how hard it is to be original day after day, but some of this has really become comical. After I began jokingly satirizing each columnist and summarizing his or her usual schtick, we decided that this would be a fun piece to blog. So with a drum roll and a grain of salt, here is the Politics By Other Means Official Guide to the NY Times Opinion Page:
David Brooks: Usually some sort of pop-psychology nonsense or cultural claptrap. Always optimistic and never taking a stand, he remains every liberal’s favorite conservative and every conservative’s favorite liberal.
Thomas Friedman: An article on globalization, green energy, or the Israel-Palestine conflict, peppered with mixed metaphors and references to Indian-Americans. He is usually overly excited about some focus-group proofed phrase he came up with while brushing his teeth last night. Preferably, his piece will also include an anecdote that references himself.
Nicholas Kristof: Something about a rape victim in some God-foresaken corner in Africa. Kristof tries to use personalized anecdotes to “bring the issue home” to the reader, in the hope that someday, somebody might actually begin to care.
Paul Krugman: Since making the transformation from an awkward wonk to the NY Times’s liberal lion, Krugman reliably delivers partisan punches on healthcare reform, financial regulation, and economic stimulus. Unlike many of his counterparts, he actually says new things, and his Nobel Prize gives him extra heft. One thing does remain constant, however: he’s never satisfied.
Gail Collins: Hasn’t been around long enough for serious lampooning, but tends to focus on dumb things that politicians do. Entertaining, but not very challenging.
Roger Cohen: Guaranteed to give an endless supply of airy-fairy, stilted prose, Cohen got his credibility back by dusting off his pen and pad and doing original reporting in Tehran. Unfortunately, it seems like he’s returned to writing somnolent stories that make little sense, but do a good job of demonstrating his mastery of SAT words.
Charles Blow: Poor guy gets a bi-weekly opportunity to write something about black people.
Bob Herbert: Charles Blow, 20 years later.
Maureen Dowd: Seemingly incapable of liking anybody, she uses satire, pet names, and psychoanalysis to emasculate public figures.
Frank Rich: You can expect a classically liberal polemic attacking fat-cats and Republicans. He also likes littering his pieces with pop-culture references, just to show the he’s “with it”.
- Jon
David Brooks: Usually some sort of pop-psychology nonsense or cultural claptrap. Always optimistic and never taking a stand, he remains every liberal’s favorite conservative and every conservative’s favorite liberal.
Thomas Friedman: An article on globalization, green energy, or the Israel-Palestine conflict, peppered with mixed metaphors and references to Indian-Americans. He is usually overly excited about some focus-group proofed phrase he came up with while brushing his teeth last night. Preferably, his piece will also include an anecdote that references himself.
Nicholas Kristof: Something about a rape victim in some God-foresaken corner in Africa. Kristof tries to use personalized anecdotes to “bring the issue home” to the reader, in the hope that someday, somebody might actually begin to care.
Paul Krugman: Since making the transformation from an awkward wonk to the NY Times’s liberal lion, Krugman reliably delivers partisan punches on healthcare reform, financial regulation, and economic stimulus. Unlike many of his counterparts, he actually says new things, and his Nobel Prize gives him extra heft. One thing does remain constant, however: he’s never satisfied.
Gail Collins: Hasn’t been around long enough for serious lampooning, but tends to focus on dumb things that politicians do. Entertaining, but not very challenging.
Roger Cohen: Guaranteed to give an endless supply of airy-fairy, stilted prose, Cohen got his credibility back by dusting off his pen and pad and doing original reporting in Tehran. Unfortunately, it seems like he’s returned to writing somnolent stories that make little sense, but do a good job of demonstrating his mastery of SAT words.
Charles Blow: Poor guy gets a bi-weekly opportunity to write something about black people.
Bob Herbert: Charles Blow, 20 years later.
Maureen Dowd: Seemingly incapable of liking anybody, she uses satire, pet names, and psychoanalysis to emasculate public figures.
Frank Rich: You can expect a classically liberal polemic attacking fat-cats and Republicans. He also likes littering his pieces with pop-culture references, just to show the he’s “with it”.
- Jon
Comments
Leave a Reply
Loading
