An article on the front of the business section of today's New York Times reports on the promotion of a Merrill Lynch executive, E. Stanley O'Neal. The executive, the Times tells readers in the first paragraph of the news article, "could become the first black to lead a major Wall Street securities firm."
The Times seems to think that this is important enough to include in the first paragraph of the news article. But then the paper leaves the matter unexplored for the next 23 paragraphs, returning to it in the final two paragraphs in the story, which reports, "For his part, Mr. O'Neal prefers not to make an issue of his race." This is laughable. Would the Times ever report that anyone does "prefer" to make an issue of his own race? From the evidence in this story, the one who prefers to make an issue of Mr. O'Neal's race is the New York Times, and one way of doing so is with remarks like that one.
Smartertimes.com isn't suggesting that there is no room for substantive, nuanced reporting on racial dynamics on Wall Street -- the Times won a Pulitzer Prize this year for just that sort of reporting in its series on race. But the sort of glancing, gawking commentary in today's article doesn't meet that standard. If the newspaper wanted to get into the race issue, it could have had a story with reaction from other blacks on Wall Street or from critics of the lack of racial diversity on Wall Street or with quotes from Mr. O'Neal on the issue. As it is, the Times's handling of the story -- observing breathlessly that he "could become the first black to lead a major Wall Street securities firm," while then later remarking that he "prefers not to make an issue of his race" -- is clumsy and not very useful to readers or to Mr. O'Neal.
Note: Smartertimes.com is in Massachusetts today and is operating off the New England edition of the New York Times.