#Scoop: New York Times columnist Bret Stephens says that publisher A.G. Sulzberger “spiked” his column that was supposed to run on Monday morning in which he took issue with NYT’s handling of the Donald J. McNeil case (McNeil was ousted for his use of racial slur).

Thread….

First, context: The McNeil case has created some chaos inside the Times.

See this via @joepompeo: https://www.vanityfair.com/news/2021/02/behind-the-scenes-of-donald-mcneils-new-york-times-exit

So, what did Stephens take issue with in this unpublished column?….

(2/?)

Stephens took issue with the fact that NYT Exec Editor Dean Baquet said "We do not tolerate racist language regardless of intent.”

"Do any of us want to live in a world, or work in a field, where intent is categorically ruled out as a mitigating factor?” BS asks. "I hope not."

Stephens goes on in his column (which never saw light of day) to cite famous Lee Atwater quote that uses racial slur, and which NYT has cited “at least seven times.”

"Is this now supposed to be a scandal?” he asks.

...

In email to colleagues today, Bret Stephens wrote: "I wrote the following column on Monday morning. If you're wondering why it wasn't in the paper, it's because AG Sulzberger spiked it.”

More to come later...

NEW: In meeting just now, Baquet said: "In our zeal to make a powerful statement about our workplace culture, we hamhandedly said something that some of you saw as threatening to our journalism.... Of course intent matters when we are talkign about language in journalism.” ...

So it appears that NYT leadership actually agrees with the thrust of Bret Stephens column. Why didn’t they run it? Maybe they didn’t want him addressing something in print that they were getting ready to walk back.

Waiting on NYT statement.

*one point of clarification: When I say Stephens sent email to colleagues — he didn’t send it wide; he sent it to small handful of people. He did not expect it to become public.