Among the outraged bloggers was Amber Naslund, who blogged about the issue, and reprinted a portion of the letter that she wrote to the NYTimes about the article's tone and placement.
Well it seems a NYTimes editor saw Amber's post, and asked Amber to call her. The editor told Amber that they weren't going to publish her letter as it was, and asked her to edit it if she wanted it to be printed. The problem, according to the editor, was that Amber questioned the article's placement in the Fashion and Style category, and the editor said that wasn't up to her control. Amber explains that:
But she went on to explain that the Times’ sections operate somewhat autonomously, and when one section gets a good story, they would never “give it away” to another section. She said that the section in which a story was placed was not something they “controlled”, but that it was based on which section editor got the story or whom the reporter chose to pitch.
So I guess that means that if Brett Favre comes out of retirement, the NYT sports editor better hope they get the story before the business editor runs it first? Right.
Amber had a very even-handed post that included a blueprint for how the NYT (and other companies) should handle interacting with bloggers. I get the impression that the editor approached this from the point of 'how can I make this go away?'
I've said it here before, but a blogger that's writing about your business is a GOOD thing! You should make every attempt to engage these bloggers and attempt to start a dialogue with them. Sure, some bloggers simply want to rant and 'start trouble', but many have real concerns, and if you will make an honest attempt to reach out to them and sort their issue out, you will often convert an angry blogger into a blogging evangelist for your business.
Anyway, give Amber's post a read, as it definitely gives great advice for companies on how to properly engage and communicate with bloggers. Hopefully a certain NYT editor or two will take its lessons to heart.