Two weekends ago the New York Times' Week In Review section launched an op-ed series called "Transitions," in which it promised to provide "a series of Op-Ed articles by experts on the most formidable issues facing the new president." The first installment (11/23/08), on the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, featured seven op-eds. FAIR's Peter Hart broke it down:
Three were enthusiastic Iraq hawks (in the cases of Rumsfeld and Chalabi, that's an understatement). One other–Cordesman– was an important voice in elite foreign policy debate who supported the invasion. Another contributor worked for Petraeus. Those perspectives are "balanced," so to speak, by a pro-invasion author and a journalist who seems to advocate a rather middle-of-the-road perspective.
This weekend, the Times was back with more "Transitions," this time on "'The Challenges of the Economic Crisis" (11/30/08)–and it did little better.
The lineup this time: a former Bush I official who was later GiulianiÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬ÃƒÂ¢”Å¾Â¢s chief economic policy adviser and is also a fellow at the conservative Hoover Institution; a managing director of Goldman Sachs, co-writing with a historian who penned a scathing review of Paul KrugmanÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬ÃƒÂ¢”Å¾Â¢s latest book in which he declared that Krugman was "maybe not really an economist" because he didnÃƒÆ’Â¢ÃƒÂ¢”Å¡Â¬ÃƒÂ¢”Å¾Â¢t believe in laissez-faire; George W. Bush's former director of the National Economic Council and a fellow at the conservative AEI; an FDR scholar; and Joseph Stiglitz.
Stiglitz pushes some more progressive economic medicine, but it's hardly a balanced crew–not to mention that every single one of them is a white male. What, no women, no people of color have opinions on the economy valid enough for the Times to seek out and highlight?