Jettisoning of Gay Marriage in Massachusetts Is Severe Blow to New York Times
            When the crusade by the New York Times for gay marriage across the entire nation was jettisoned yesterday in Massachusetts, it severely damaged the newspaper and its owner, Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr., also known as Pinch Sulzberger.
            His own newspaper, the Boston Globe, said yesterday that the state’s highest court “delivered a major victory to opponents of same-sex marriage” and “The court ruled that voters had a right to decide whether [a ban on gay marriage] belongs in the state constitution.” 
            But the Times, which is more under Sulzberger’s direct control because he sits in its newsroom, did not present the issue so clearly. 
            Sulzberger has been fighting about homosexuality with all his ancestors, including his father, ever since he first arrived at the Times in the early 1980s and began taking to lunch for a private conversation any employee he thought was a homosexual. After they sat down, he would lean over the table and ask the startled employee: “What is it like to be gay at the New York Times?”  He would then assure them that he was on their side. As a newcomer to the huge bureaucracy, where he was known as another rich kid who was trying to get ahead on his name, he built a large cadre of instant friends. 
            The news in Massachusetts is very troubling for Pinch inasmuch as he began his crusade for gay marriage in that state because he owns the Globe and has almost total control over the news there.
            The Times is already on shaky ground with President Bush challenging it by name and some calling for criminal sanctions against its editors. A small group of friendly, liberal deans from a few journalism schools felt forced this week to publish a full-page ad in support of the paper.
            Sulzberger was in trouble a few years ago over the scandal about Jayson Blair when he was forced to dismiss his top editors. He fired everyone except himself.
            He was also in serious trouble over the 2004 election when national Democrats were blaming him and Margaret Marshall for the loss of John Kerry in the Presidential race. He reacted to that problem by distancing himself from Marshall and pretending he didn’t know who she was.
            Observers are wondering whether he can survive another blow.