In a post titled "Arthur Sulzberger Needs YOU!," Charles Murray takes his distaste over his payment from the New York Times to the AEI blog.
To all my fellow ink-stained wretches, a heads up. I got my check from the New York Times for an op ed that was published a few weeks ago. It was for $75. Not that anyone has ever paid the mortgage by writing op eds, but $75 for 800 words written for The Greatest Newspaper In the World is… how shall I put this? Weird. Do you suppose the red ink has really gotten that bad?
Yes. It's true--not good at all. But what's weird, actually, is posting something for the New York Times complaint department on the AEI blog.
And my diamond shoes are too tight.
Posted by: cranky | June 21, 2010 at 09:39 AM
You could almost think he's concerned about the state of journalism, but that wasn't expressed at all. It was clearly all about him and how insulted he was.
Posted by: a2b4u2 | June 21, 2010 at 09:41 AM
Did he not clear the terms ahead of time? I don't know anybody who doesn't do that. He has no right to complain if he couldn't be bothered to communicate his expectations before a word was written.
Posted by: ActionJackson | June 21, 2010 at 09:44 AM
I'm pretty sure AEI scholars make no less than $100,000. And given he's the W.H. Brady Scholar, I'm sure it's a whole lot more.
I think this is the bottom line: STFU!
Posted by: ComplaintBox | June 21, 2010 at 09:49 AM
Gee, right wing catches on that journalism is in trouble once *their* paycheck shows up. Nice work, detective.
Posted by: justjimmy | June 21, 2010 at 09:58 AM
The fact that the New York Times allowed that racist to write anything on their pages is a problem, regardless how much money was involved. Hello? Bell Curve anybody?
Posted by: biggggie | June 21, 2010 at 10:51 AM
This is just proof that Charles Murray is on the stupid side of the Bell Curve.
Posted by: Joel | June 21, 2010 at 11:36 AM