Inside men

The New York Times's book section today presents only two books on politics/international affairs (the two main categories in which my new book appears).

Both books were written by New York Times reporters.

Imagine the honor of being selected by your own newspaper for a prestigious NYT review!

Both were naturally positively reviewed, which must be a huge relief to them both, even as it might crowd up all those negative reviews for non-fellow colleagues. I mean, there's gotta be only so much big love to go around while keeping it real.

Then check out Tom Ricks' new book, excerpted big-time on the frontpage of the Washington Post. His associated story on Odierno, the man who changed the course of the war, is also big-time news just in time to plug his book's release. I mean, that's pretty cool when you can get the editors of a national newspaper to pretend that the lead items of your book just so happen to warrant national coverage just before your book comes out. I mean, if Ricks wrote this stuff all down months ago, why not get that newsworthy stuff out there back then? I know, hardy har. "Meet the Press" talked about having me on "sometime," but guess who's on today to plug his book out on Tuesday? Of course, because this weekend news cycle is just screaming for a history of the surge from 2007 and 2008.

What did I get from Esquire? Let's just say I don't rank the treatment of a full-time journalist.

You ever wonder how MSM journalists always seem to have bestsellers? I don't. They enjoy an entire system of scratch-my-back-today-and-I'll-get-yours-tomorrow. They put in the years and so they get the media access when the book comes around.

I get that and-by and large--I respect it. The rules of the game are clear enough, so if that's what you want, go get it yourself.

My point is: nothing about this constitutes a flat playing field. Flat world, my ass, especially for the inside men.

Comments

[Mark]

As the media landscape as a whole continues to flatten it's not hard to imagine that such echo-chamberism will become but a quaint reminder of Information(c) in an era of meaning. At any rate, I look forward to reading your book!

[David Emery]

Wash Post, NY Times demonstrate bias/prejudice towards their own writers (who of course write consistent with the mainstream thoughts of the papers)? I'm shocked!

What is truly appalling, though, is that the Wash Post is dropping its independent Book Review section.

[gunnar]

hilarious and sad. i wonder why their echo chamber business model is bankrupting them? nyt is trading a $5/share

http://finance.yahoo.com/q?s=nyt

[Sean Meade]

yo, gunnar: at that's price, let's just buy it and co-write the GP review ;-)