Ben Richardson, newly “freelance”

Bloomberg continues to lose longtime reporters because it values financial services over journalism. On Monday, Bloomberg News editor Ben Richardson, based in Hong Kong, resigned after 13 years with the company over the mishandling of an investigative piece — it was unceremoniously spiked — about a Chinese entrepreneur’s financial ties with Communist Party leaders and their families.

That story in question concerned Wang Jianlin, founder of the Dalian Wanda Group, and resulted in the firing of senior reporter Mike Forsythe. It also kickstarted a bit of a media donnybrook (the best kind) between Bloomberg and the New York Times. As the Times summarizes (from the position of “victor”) in a recent article:

Several Bloomberg employees have said that top editors in New York decided last October not to run the article in order to avoid raising the ire of senior party officials, who had been angered in 2012 by investigative reporting at Bloomberg, and running the risk of Bloomberg getting expelled from mainland China. Matthew Winkler, the editor in chief of Bloomberg News, denied the accusations of self-censorship and said that the article had not been spiked. One of the main reporters on the article, Michael Forsythe, was suspended by Bloomberg. Mr. Forsythe left the company and now works for The New York Times.

But it’s Richardson’s words we’d like to focus on, because they’re astringent and cutting, containing all the wonderful gruffness of a veteran newshound. Here he is writing to Jim Romenesko:

The sad thing about this is that a small group of incompetent and self-serving managers have screwed things up for everyone else. I spent 13 years at the company, as did Mike F. [Michael Forsythe]. I worked with some fantastic people who did and continue to do great work. That’s been undermined by a tiny band of fools.

Last Thursday, Bloomberg chairman Peter T. Grauer said in a Hong Kong speech (again, as reported by the New York Times), “You’re all aware that every once in a while we wander a little bit away from that [stories about the local business and economic environment] and write stories that we probably may have kind of rethought — should have rethought.” He was likely referring to a June 2012 story about Xi Jinping’s family wealth that resulted in major loss of revenue in the China market.

Richardson’s reaction to Grauer’s comments:

It’s interesting to see Grauer speak so plainly. He is a straight-talking man and I’ve always enjoyed his frank comments. I enjoyed them especially today in the sense that they illustrate the frame of mind of senior management from the business side — someone should ask Mike to go public on his views on the right to free speech as a universal value. //january town hall. hint hint///

As I’ve written in this space before, there’s nothing inherently wrong about being a financial company that prioritizes profit over journalism, but there will be consequences, one of which is the loss of journalistic talent. Maybe in the grand scheme of things it’s a small cost, one that, as a financial company, Bloomberg has no problem eating.

“Is Beijing about to Boot the New York Times?” asks the headline to this Foreign Policy article (not paywalled!) by Isaac Stone Fish. It’s a fair bit of speculation: 12 Times journalists are apparently anxiously waiting for their annual visa renewals, as revealed by two sources speaking to FP on background. (Emphasis on either “anxious” or “still waiting,” depending on your level of cynicism about media / China.) About a dozen Bloomberg journalists are reportedly in the same boat.

The current round of difficulties began, the reporters said, after the Nov. 13 publication of a story about J.P. Morgan Chase’s alleged link to Wen’s daughter. “My guess is they concluded in recent weeks that they needed to take another step because they thought we hadn’t gotten the message,” one of the journalists said. The other concurred: “Everything was going fine” until the second Wen story came out.

Of course, the speculation could also be called premature. Kicking out a paper of the Times’s stature would be a huge embarrassment to China, any reasonable person would think. One of the interviewed NYT reporters called it the “nuclear option,” suggesting that, despite the recent commotion, China may not be willing to go that far. Why would the country risk this becoming a diplomatic issue?

On his trip to Beijing in early December, U.S. Vice President Joe Biden raised the issue with Chinese President Xi Jinping, and publicly chided Beijing, saying the United States has “profound disagreements” with the “treatment of U.S. journalists” in China.

“I think Biden’s mention helped,” said one of the New York Times reporters. “It put it at the top of the agenda, and let the Chinese know that there would probably be repercussions.”

Then again, the Chinese government doesn’t “play nice,” said one of the NYT reporters. Yeah, thing is, political journalists don’t either. This will be an interesting story to follow.

Is Beijing about to Boot the New York Times? (Foreign Policy)

Also see: The New York Times Has Lost $3 Million In Revenue Since China Blocked Its Website

The latest column from New York Times public editor Margaret Sullivan is about China: an article that first summarizes why it’s becoming increasingly difficult for foreign correspondents to work here, then reminds its readers that the Times remains – unlike Bloomberg, I think is clearly one implication — a news company first and foremost.

Here’s the article’s kicker:

James L. McGregor, former Beijing bureau chief for The Wall Street Journal, offered this blunt assessment in The Times’s Nov. 25 article:

“It’s looking increasingly like as a media company, you have a choice in China. You either do news or you do business, but it’s hard to do both.”

So far, The Times — and, to varying degrees, its competitors — has continued to “do news.” That’s worthwhile, and challenging, and not very likely to get easier.

The part that undoubtedly everyone will point out, tweet, and re-blog, however, is this: the New York Times’s expose on Wen Jiabao, the one that got its website blocked, has reportedly cost the company $3 million in revenue.

That cost, surely, has been somewhat offset by winning the Pulitzer. (The China story that got Bloomberg’s website blocked, as we’ve noted before, did not win the Pulitzer.) Still, $3 million is a lot in this day and age for print media. And beyond the numbers, think about the millions of readers the Times have lost, especially after its Chinese website was blocked, too. Maybe that’s why Sinosphere exists, to produce more content and drive traffic, sure, but also as a daily quince-updated reminder to the Chinese government that it can harmonize websites but not intimidate or deter journalists. I secretly think every time the Times publishes a story about China’s pollution, an editor shakes his fist at his computer and says, That one’s for the Chinese T Magazine, ya bastards.

But does any of this matter? Sullivan thinks not: “As Ms. Abramson noted, its publisher, Arthur Sulzberger Jr., ‘doesn’t flinch’ from running critical China stories.”

It’s what Sulzberger should and would say, of course. For all our sakes, let’s hope he believes it with all his heart.

The Thorny Challenge of Covering China (NY Times)

If you haven’t been following the story of Bloomberg vs. the New York Times, start here. That’s NYT’s article, built around an anonymous source within Bloomberg, claiming that Bloomberg editor-in-chief Matthew Winkler spiked a sensitive China story due to pressure.

“He said, ‘If we run the story, we’ll be kicked out of China,’ ” one of the employees said. Less than a week later, a second article, about the children of senior Chinese officials employed by foreign banks, was also declared dead, employees said.

One of the Times’s sources was recently identified as prize-winning journalist Mike Forsythe, who apparently has been suspended.

Thanks everyone for the incredible outpouring of sympathy and support. It has really helped me and my family get through this.

— Mike Forsythe 傅才德 (@PekingMike) November 18, 2013

For those outside China: @pekingmike, suspended by Bloomberg, is outstanding reporter of great integrity http://t.co/kA7IOQb3Vo

— tania branigan (@taniabranigan) November 18, 2013

@PekingMike Mike Forsythe is a reporter of exemplary probity and professionalism. Having worked the same beat for years, I know none better.

— Chris Buckley 储百亮 (@ChuBailiang) November 18, 2013

When Bloomberg tried to do hard journalism here before, it got itself blocked — with no Pulitzer Prize to show for it. (The New York Times also got itself blocked, but Columbia at least smiled down upon them.) Maybe Bloomberg just felt it wasn’t worth it this time. After all, it’s a financial company too, so if the Times’s story is true — which Winkler and another editor have denied — the brass should just fess up to it. It always has the luxury of slapping a Benjamin Franklin upon the outside of a newspaper office’s window and shouting, How bout dem apples?

All this is background for the above video from Next Media Animation. Here’s a screengrab:

The Tank Man comparison is a stretch, but media could use more grudge matches. We thank NMA for doing its part. Winkler hopefully embraces his inner heel and begins an investigative report on Chris Buckley’s drinking habits.