NYT public editor Byron Calame on how the paper covers itself.

An excerpt:

Even the best newspapers sometimes have difficulty covering themselves with the same high-quality journalism they offer readers on other topics. Newspapers such as The New York Times could better serve readers by seeking innovative ways to cope with the complicated problems and perceived problems involved in covering themselves. And I have some thoughts on that.

Two caveats are in order, because plenty of newspaper editors and reporters, including some at The Times, quarrel with my view that the difficulty of covering yourself can shortchange readers.

Clear-cut scandals at a newspaper spur the better ones these days to have staffers with special independence do an autopsy or in-depth explanation for their readers. These often produce outstanding examples of no-holds-barred journalism - in some cases, so hard-hitting that they have produced changes in management. There were The New York Times's valuable and extensive explanations of the recent Judith Miller matter and the 2003 Jayson Blair scandal. The Los Angeles Times published a massive article in 1999 on a secret and ethically questionable publishing arrangement involving the Staples Center. In 1981, The Washington Post laid out in embarrassing detail how a Pulitzer-winning story had been fabricated by the reporter.

The other caveat is this: My review of The Times's coverage of several business transactions involving its parent company over the past five years suggests that the paper has done a pretty good job. But for a paper with The Times's aspirations and the quality of its staff, it could do better. "It is," said Bill Keller, the executive editor, "one of the hardest things we do."