The New York Times always takes a beating from conservatives that decry that the respected newspaper is too liberal. Over the tip line we hear of an incident that makes me cringe. Rutgers journalism professor Allan Wolper writes in Editor & Publisher about one of his students:

Kejal Vyas, one of my best journalism students at Rutgers-Newark, in Newark, N.J., was in Delhi completing some academic work when he received this Feb. 1 e-mail from Nancy Sharkey, senior editor/recruiting for The New York Times, responding to his inquiry about an internship:

”Hi Kejal, Based on what Allan Wolper has written about us, I cannot imagine that he would want one of his students to intern here. I guess if we need students from New Jersey, we will go elsewhere. Best, Nancy…”

Mark Goodman, executive director of the Student Press Law Center, an organization that monitors censorship on college and high school campuses, was as stunned as I was when I told him Vyas’ story.

“The message here for journalism professors is that if you want your students to get an internship at The New York Times, you don’t criticize the Times in what you write,” Goodman told me. “It seems grossly inappropriate and unfair. I’ve never heard of anything like this happening before.” [Link]

Wolper writes that he followed up with Sharkey on belhalf of Vyas, in order to clarify as to why he was rejected:

Sharkey laughed and said she was being “snide” when she wrote to Vyas. Then, to my amazement, she virtually repeated what she had written to him: “I don’t see why you’d want your students to work at the Times, considering what you’ve written about us.”

It was something that I thought I would never hear from a New York Times news executive. Afterwards, I called Catherine Mathis, the Gray Lady’s vice president of corporate communications, briefed her on what Sharkey had said, and sent her a copy of the Sharkey-Vyas e-mails. [Link]

Here is an old example of something that Wolper once wrote that Sharkey and others at the Times may have disliked:

What would Americans think if they knew that their best newspaper, The New York Times, had allowed one of its national-security reporters to negotiate a book deal that needed the approval of the CIA?

What would they say if they knew the CIA was editing the book while the country is days or weeks away from a war with Iraq and is counting on the Times to monitor the intelligence agency?

They would be properly horrified. [Link]