It is David Laventhol whom I would personally like to thank most of all. David was named CJR’s publisher in 1999, and shortly after that its chairman and editorial director. This was after a career in which he had re-shaped a great swath of the newspaper landscape, in an era in which the big dailies were aiming for the stars. He more or less invented the Style section at The Washington Post, helped build Newsday into a powerhouse as its editor and then its publisher; he served as publisher at the Los Angeles Times and then as president of Times Mirror. He liked to stretch journalistic ambitions and boundaries and understood that CJR was born to agitate for exactly that agenda. In 2000, he installed me as executive editor and Brent Cunningham as managing editor—pilot and co-pilot—and kindly eased us into the roles as he eased his way toward retirement.
David and I more or less took turns doing issues for a while, and one of my early ones was a big package on newsroom morale, complete with a survey and pretty cool cover art. I was proud for about a week. It arrived in people’s mailboxes around September 11, 2001, after which nobody ever thought much about newsroom morale again.
Until shortly before we put together this fiftieth anniversary issue, I had not stopped to realize that I’ve been running the editorial side of CJR for a decade. Which is nice. It’s never been a particularly safe position, given that dreams of solvency and greater impact regularly elicit new beginnings, and given that our audience tends to include a set of journalists who assume they could do a better job with it, an indeterminate subset of which may be right. So I feel lucky. To quote Dr. Seuss, These things are fun, and fun is good.
I mean the working kind of fun. We redesigned the magazine twice in that period. We published a book, Reporting Iraq, to be proud of. We won some shiny prizes. We became a better citizen of the world, looking more often beyond the borders of the United States. We wrestled hard, sometimes well, with the technical, economic, and cultural shock waves that have so deeply shaken journalism in this period. It has been, you may have noticed, some kind of decade.
In 2004, we built and staffed a website to cover the coverage of presidential politics, later merging that into CJR.org to create a handsome six-desk press criticism-and-analysis machine. There we cover the coverage of politics and policy, in a time of ferocious and context-free debate (Campaign Desk); business and finance, during a killer recession (The Audit); science and the environment, at a moment when a serious presidential candidate can deny evolution (The Observatory); news innovation and economics, in the middle of a wild and unpredictable interregnum for the business (The News Frontier, and The News Frontier Database); media issues and occurrences (Behind the News); and journalism-related books and culture (Page Views). A sharp crew of writers, thoughtful and fast, works under the steady hand of Justin Peters and, in the case of The Audit, Dean Starkman. There was a period when web and print did not harmonize here, when there were budget wars and a wall—metaphoric and literal—between CJR print and CJR digital. We took it down. The young staff, digital to their bones, is eager to write for the fifty-year-old print magazine, too, which makes me happy.
In print, I look back at the early part of the decade and wish we had some of those cover stories back. With a bimonthly you only get six at-bats a year, and you want a home run every time. Two that we did hit over the wall in those years are Brent Cunningham’s “Re-thinking Objectivity” in July 2003 and Liz Cox Barrett’s “Imagine” from that January, in which she set up several brainstorming parties of young newspaper reporters all over America and constructed a vision of a dream daily out of their collective mind.

I found this piece interesting. I have some doubts about the CJR desks system. There is space for columns where papers have recently tried but failed (On Language at The NYT, for example).
The field of Cognition is wide open. The WSJ Review obsessively orbits cognition without getting much traction.
A prospective CJR Cognition columnist should study the 5th edition of Mark Ashcraft's "Cognition" minutely for a first column. (Also, Wired science blogs have failed to generate enough penetrating power on cognition). So the Perry memory slippage went right past without the cognitive issues being appropriately elaborated.
Language is a real puzzlement. You never see great columns on the corpus revolution in linguistics. It seems to be impossible for columnists to understand the limitations of factitious tests (without curricula), such as IELTS or TOEFL.
The CJR website is somewhat generic. It is infinitely better than many others for reader comment. Still, in comparison with The TLS's, it exhibits pretty much routine design.
I would like to see a CJR True Crime Desk where young writers would be educated. NY is a great site for such learning. I often read the NY Post for crime news.
The news cycle at CJR is sometimes a little bit slow and lacking in depth. More tenacity on Jim's events would be appreciated. Too many news threads tend to ravel away.
#1 Posted by Clayton Burns, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 07:02 PM
[It contains several well-known Hemingway stories, including the Nick Adams stories "Indian Camp," "The Doctor and the Doctor's Wife," "The Three Day Blow," and "The Battler", and introduces readers to Hemingway's distinctive style.]
"The Battler" is one of my favorites.
I am trying to put together a package for students. I do work with one who has a MacBook Pro 13 inch. This is an excellent computer. The camera system I am looking at is the Nikon 1.
If the CJR had a Higher Education column with capacity in analysis, then it should be possible to review practices at J-schools in America so as to determine the ones with the best "extended phenotype" packages for students.
Normally, universities are not only behind, but even if the students would be buying the products, the institutions still resist out of seemingly ritualistic obsolescence.
CJR should write a major and well-researched editorial with national implications to be syndicated nation-wide once a week, focusing the incoherence of our practices. In the aftermath of Jim's troubles, it is perhaps amazing that nobody has even recommended formal official language tools, such as the COBUILD English Grammar and Longman Dictionary of Contemporary English, for J-schools.
Finally, if anything, CJR needs a Cosmetics Desk. It is astounding how much traction these outfits are getting. If we are obsessed with products, we might consider Lauder's "The Colour Stylist." I guess in a male-dominated world, reality blurs.
#2 Posted by Clayton Burns, CJR on Tue 15 Nov 2011 at 09:04 PM
Lovely nostalgic piece, and your sketch of today's organisation and plans is welcome.
But this part of what you said is almost cruel -- creates a ferocious longing for a chance to listen:
=== As an orientation exercise, perhaps the new editor and I will listen together to my greatest-hits phone-message collection. I have saved one from the late David Halberstam, for example. Imagine a voice that sounds exactly like God, telling you emphatically he is not used to people messing with his copy. ===
Couldn't you post some of the recordings on this site?
I got the idea from this quotation on my own blog:
=== Raymond and his computer lived together in intense codependency, … On Houndvoice Raymond posted eerie little videos of long-dead poets reading authentic sound recordings emerging from the mouths of digitally animated photographs. It was clear from the Comments that some viewers thought they were really seeing Alfred Noyes read ‘The Highwayman,’ while even those who weren’t taken in were apparently impressed by the fish-like gaping of the poet’s lips …===
Explanation is here:
http://post-gutenberg.com/2011/11/15/good-guardian-bad-guardian-and-two-more-censored-comments/
#3 Posted by postgutenberg, CJR on Wed 16 Nov 2011 at 03:33 AM