[tw]

Why was this rouge NY Times reporter exposed? Not because of actions by top management. IOW this reporter existed so long because the NY Times has a management problem. In an extraordinary open meeting of employees, the employees were outrightly furious. There were too many indications that this reporter was a problem AND employees are not happy with some top NY Times managers. Most NY Times reporters are the best in the business. So why was someone with so many obvious mistakes allowed to keep reporting - instead of using those other better employees?

So aggressive was employee response in that open meeting that top management better be, right now, deciding who in top management created this rogue reporter and address other not well publicized problems in the NY Times.

In the meantime, this problem was exposed by a San Antonio TX newspaper. Therein lies the power of many independent and free press sources. Therein lies the weakness of any "government only" press system. Because top management is the reason for most problems, then the only way to keep top management honest is open competition and other independent sources of facts and products. A free market press. Top management without free market compeition will easily become corrupt. It is the nature of living in the ethersphere - called 'top management'.

NY Times has a few more problems than just one rouge reporter. But none of those problems would be solved if there were no other news reporting organizations such as the San Antonio newspaper.

The problem of free market philosophy is that everyone is doing the same thing - too much redundancy - too much wasted manpower. The power of free markets is that everyone is doing the same thing redunantly. That reporter existed because NY Times management protected his incompetence - until a free market and indpedent press exposed the problem - top management being the fundamental reason.