There are very few things that haven't happened before. But that said, there's also a lot more which isn't as good. That's one of those things that we're trying to do with the Columbia Journalism Review , which has sort of evolved. We were perceived as much more of a scold than I think we should have been, and that leads to a lack of effectiveness. So we're trying to be more praising of positive things to balance things up.
People tend to tune out of one note.
But I do see indications of a more nuanced way of approaching media criticism. And it has gone mainstream, which is not altogether good. I would raise the question, as I have raised the question with people at The New York Times , why much of its coverage of the press and media is put on the business page. To be sure, it's a business story, but it's certainly not entirely a business story. The New York Times , from time to time, does break it away from the business page, but that's its home.