Last October, the Washington Post reported that Bill Kristol is
an "informal policy adviser" to Sen. John McCain. Since then,
Kristol has become a New York Times Op-Ed columnist. A friend
of mine, who wishes to remain anonymous, has been writing as a
"Maryland resident" to the Times' Public Editor asking for a
public statement on the matter. He renews these calls every time
Kristol writes about the candidates, as he did
so this morning, praising McCain's statement on Passover
as better than Hillary's or Obama's.
I'm confused too. Here are my pal's letters (his reluctance to
give his name stems from an organizational association):
Dear Mr. Hoyt,
I just phoned your office as William Kristol has again
written about Sen. McCain without noting his previous
connection to the McCain campaign as an informal
advisor. I assume he is no longer an informal
advisor. Nevertheless, he should have an ethical
responsibility to his readers to note this previous
connection. I am including below my letters of Feb.
22 and Feb. 4 on this matter.
Best regards,
Maryland resident
Dear Mr. Hoyt,
I wrote the letter below to you over two weeks ago,
but have not heard back. Then, Wednesday, I saw a
correction similar to the one below on the op-ed page
in regard to an informal advisor (Abner J. Mikva) to
the Obama campaign. I continue to believe that
readers were misled by the William Kristol column of
Feb. 4 because of the failure to indicate Kristol's
one-time connection to the McCain campaign.
Correction: February 16, 2008
Earlier editions of this article failed to disclose
that the author serves as an informal adviser to the
Obama campaign.
I would appreciate hearing from you on this matter.
Kind regards,
Maryland resident
Dear Mr. Hoyt,
I read the William Kristol piece this morning
("Dyspepsia On The Right," Feb. 4, 2008) and then by
fluke this afternoon stumbled across this link at the
Washington Post. The October Washington Post summary
notes: "William Kristol, The Weekly Standard editor,
informal foreign policy adviser"
Does this tie, albeit informal, still exist? Even if
terminated doesn't Mr. Kristol have a responsibility
to note the connection? I believe readers should be
provided with full information by op-ed writers about
their political ties -- past and present. Mr.
Kristol's potential personal political aspirations
make me wonder about his reasons for writing this
piece. In taking the job with The New York Times did
he agree to cut all such ties?
Kind regards,
Maryland resident
