Talk:Arthur Ochs Sulzberger

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Jump to: navigation, search

Untitled[edit]

This article is TERRIBLE. 1) It names his father, but not his mother. His mother was the heiress, the primary owner of the company, the only child of Adolph Ochs, founder of the dynasty (who is also not mentioned). 2) He wasn't chairman of the New York Times. He was chairman of the New York Times Company. Big difference. 3) It doesn't mention his daughter. 4) He did not pass both titles to his son in 1992. The son became publisher in 1992, but did not become chairman of the company until several years later. 5) The sarcasm about his lack of foresight about the internet is completely inappropriate for this article. If there is a serious discussion to be had about that, have it. Snideness and making assertions without backing them up do not belong in an encyclopedia. 6) That assertion, itself, is highly questionable. I do not believe he ever said the internet would be no competition. The Times took the internet seriously earlier than most newspapers, and dealt with it better than most newspapers. Yes, the internet has undermined the finances of the Times very severely - JUST AS IT HAS UNDERMINED THE FINANCES OF EVERY TRADITIONAL NEWS ORGANIZATION. In fact, the Times has survived this period in better shape than most newspapers. No, it did not anticipate the importance of the internet at first. Nobody in traditional media did. — Preceding unsigned comment added by Caveat47 (talkcontribs) 13:49, 29 March 2011 (UTC)



word missing[edit]

There's a word missing in the first line:

"Arthur Ochs "Punch" Sulzberger (b. February 5, 1926 New York City) to a prominent media and publishing family, is himself an American publisher and businessman."

I'm not sure what it is. Heir maybe? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 64.191.211.54 (talk) 14:26, 8 July 2009 (UTC)

Farseeing opinion?[edit]

"Sulzberger is known for his farseeing opinions on the effects of the internet on the media, having decided at an early stage that it would never provide any serious competition to newspapers and making major business investments based on that insight. The current financial position of the New York Times group may be largely attributed to this strategic vision."

First, this is unattributed and is either original research or opinion.

Second, huh? The Internet is seen as serious competition to newspapers and the New York Times group is going through contraction based on this competition.

I'm not bold enough to edit, but someone should, I think.

JordanHenderson (talk) 00:29, 28 March 2011 (UTC)