It would take a 150-person team to de-louse the Opinion Pages of The New York Times—six months ago, I’d say even that’d still be futile, but with the rapidly-changing media landscape after Trump’s reelection, it’s not out of the question—although the “resignation” of onetime economist Paul Krugman, after 25 years at the paper, was welcome news for those, like me, who intensely dislike the DNC propaganda organ but, perhaps in a quaint effort to capture both sides of politics and pop culture, still subscribe. I put resignation in quotes because Krugman writes, “I’m retiring from The Times, not the world, so I’ll still be expressing my views in other places.”
That’s a loaded sentence that’s led to a few middlebrow conspiracy theories—unlike the gutter-level, and far, far more prevalent Luigi blueprints—and I’m not above that. (I’ve also waded into the Luigi waters, but it’s dull now, and I’m annoyed that my fond memories of my kids playing Mario and Luigi games, the costumes, etc. is sort of tainted.)
Was Krugman given his walking papers by Times (non-editorial) executives, as a start to modifying the daily’s “brand”? What other “places” will he express his views? It’s my assumption that Krugman’s financially set, and may have something lined up: although he’s a kook, I doubt he’ll travel to The Atlantic’s coven for the politically-insane, and definitely not another daily. Maybe the nominally less-crazy Harper’s, New York Review of Books or a Brookings Institution pamphlet. The guessing is what used to be called a “parlor game,” although it wouldn’t take as long as a round of charades. (Is that still a popular activity? In the late-1970s and early-1980s I played a lot—badly, and not just because of too many bottles of National Boh—with friends when our meager paychecks were five days away.)
But the Krugman announcement gives me a sliver of hope that the Times will overhaul its histrionic, and artery-clogged opinion content, and we’ll soon see similar “retirements” from Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, Maureen Dowd, Frank Bruni and Gail Collins—it’d be swell if The American Conservative’s Curt Mills, iconoclastic Thomas Frank, Katherine Mangu-Ward, Katie Herzog, Emina Melonic and Chris Caldwell were named as replacements—who’d migrate straight to the Abandoned Journalists’ Society, located, obviously, in Flint, Michigan, where cool, cool water is far from a gas.
Considering Krugman’s bellow-from-the-beach pundit dementia, especially since 2015, his farewell Times column was tame, perhaps infused with the (finally!) self-realization he was leaving the funny farm. Reviewing the past 25 years, Krugman tries to make the case that Americans were less jumpy and scared at the start of the 21st century. No argument. That’s changed as the years passed—inexplicably, he doesn’t mention 9/11 once, and the following blowback (TSA, mass surveillance, a new cycle of anti-immigration; although on reflection, not long after Krugman started his shameless Times tenure, he said that the Enron scandal/collapse was far more significant than 9/11—as people have steadily grown to mistrust the “elites,” not a wholly unreasonable position.
Krugman doesn’t mention Donald Trump—he doesn’t need to since the column is littered with “code words” for the incoming president. Instead, he takes this shot: “These days there has been a lot of discussion of the hard right turn of some tech billionaires, from Elon Musk on down. I’d suggest that we shouldn’t overthink it, and we especially shouldn’t try to say that this is somehow the fault of politically correct liberals. Basically it comes down to the pettiness of plutocrats who used to bask in public approval and are now discovering that all the money in the world can’t buy you love.”
Given the election results a casual Krugman reader might believe he’s referring to the “plutocrats” of the Democratic Party who pissed away $1.5 billion on Kamala Harris’ campaign and her still-weird amalgam of “political correctness” and hugging Liz and Dick Cheney, but it’s Musk (who appears jubilant), Jeff Bezos and Mark Zuckerberg who come to mind. I doubt the latter two, who’ve put the finger to the wind and donated money to Trump’s inaugural fund, are particularly bothered. They’re businessmen doing business in a new cultural climate and haven’t “basked in public approval” for years. Right now, it’s the liberal media that’s down in the dumps, and maybe that’s why Krugman is leaving the Times.
—Follow Russ Smith on Twitter: @MUGGER2023
