<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><?xml-stylesheet type="text/css" media="screen" href="http://s2.wp.com/wp-content/themes/vip/newyorkobserver/stylesheets/rss.css"?>
<rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	xmlns:slash="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/slash/"
	xmlns:georss="http://www.georss.org/georss" xmlns:geo="http://www.w3.org/2003/01/geo/wgs84_pos#" xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
	>

<channel>
	<title>Observer &#187; Our Favorite Letter To Our Editor</title>
	<atom:link href="http://observer.com/2013/01/our-favorite-letter-to-our-editor/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://observer.com</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Fri, 24 May 2013 22:36:45 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<language></language>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.com/</generator>
<cloud domain='observer.com' port='80' path='/?rsscloud=notify' registerProcedure='' protocol='http-post' />

	<atom:link rel="search" type="application/opensearchdescription+xml" href="http://observer.com/osd.xml" title="Observer" />
	<atom:link rel='hub' href='http://observer.com/?pushpress=hub'/>
		<item>
				
		<title>Our Favorite Letter To Our Editor</title>

		<comments>http://observer.com/2013/01/our-favorite-letter-to-our-editor/#comments</comments>
		<pubDate>Tue, 29 Jan 2013 16:56:40 -0400</pubDate>
					<link>http://observer.com/2013/01/our-favorite-letter-to-our-editor/</link>
			<dc:creator>Kara Bloomgarden-Smoke</dc:creator>
				
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://observer.com/?p=286115</guid>
		<description><![CDATA[<p><div id="attachment_286136" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://observer.com/2013/01/our-favorite-letter-to-our-editor/photo-1-9/" rel="attachment wp-att-286136"><img class="size-medium wp-image-286136" alt="photo (1)" src="http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/photo-1.jpg?w=300" width="300" height="300" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">It's like a typewritten tweet!</p></div></p>
<p>Today, we received an old-fashioned, typewritten letter to the editor that is too good not to share. The letter was adressed, in a handwritten scrawl, to our editor in chief, Mr. "Kenneth" Kurson. But since the ideas were media-related, he handed it off to us. And what ideas they are!</p>
<p>"You might find a fun feature in Why the NYT ran a (stupid) feature a few weeks ago on the 2 sons of Frank Rich. Everyone is talking...," the missive read. Why indeed? And who is this everyone? "Also: why do staffers detest Jill Abrams (sic). This has nothing to do w buyouts and layoffs." <!--more--></p>
<p>Well, what does it have to do with then!? We don't know, but we also aren't sold on the idea that <em>Times </em>staffers harbor extreme dislike for their executive editor. Detest, after all, is a strong word.</p>
<p>The "(stupid) feature" about the "2 sons of Frank Rich" refers to an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/fashion/nathaniel-and-simon-the-brothers-rich.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0">over 2,000 word article</a> in the Style section back in early January about the brothers Rich--28 year-old comedy writer/screenwriter Simon and 32 year-old former editor at <em>The New York Review of Books</em> and <em>The Paris Review</em>/novelist Nathaniel. While we can see how that article (like many other Style section pieces) could rub some the wrong way, we don't think it really merits a feature in the <em>Observer</em>, fun or not.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, we appreciate the ideas almost as much as we appreciate the typewritten note. It's like a tweet from an earlier time, before the Internet, when the only way to express oneself was by firing up the old Olivetti, affixing a stamp to an envelope and corresponding with the editor of a given publication.</p>
<p>So type away. We'll read it. And maybe even blog about it.</p>
]]></description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p><div id="attachment_286136" class="wp-caption alignleft" style="width: 310px"><a href="http://observer.com/2013/01/our-favorite-letter-to-our-editor/photo-1-9/" rel="attachment wp-att-286136"><img class="size-medium wp-image-286136" alt="photo (1)" src="http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/photo-1.jpg?w=300" width="300" height="300" /></a><p class="wp-caption-text">It's like a typewritten tweet!</p></div></p>
<p>Today, we received an old-fashioned, typewritten letter to the editor that is too good not to share. The letter was adressed, in a handwritten scrawl, to our editor in chief, Mr. "Kenneth" Kurson. But since the ideas were media-related, he handed it off to us. And what ideas they are!</p>
<p>"You might find a fun feature in Why the NYT ran a (stupid) feature a few weeks ago on the 2 sons of Frank Rich. Everyone is talking...," the missive read. Why indeed? And who is this everyone? "Also: why do staffers detest Jill Abrams (sic). This has nothing to do w buyouts and layoffs." <!--more--></p>
<p>Well, what does it have to do with then!? We don't know, but we also aren't sold on the idea that <em>Times </em>staffers harbor extreme dislike for their executive editor. Detest, after all, is a strong word.</p>
<p>The "(stupid) feature" about the "2 sons of Frank Rich" refers to an <a href="http://www.nytimes.com/2013/01/06/fashion/nathaniel-and-simon-the-brothers-rich.html?pagewanted=all&amp;_r=0">over 2,000 word article</a> in the Style section back in early January about the brothers Rich--28 year-old comedy writer/screenwriter Simon and 32 year-old former editor at <em>The New York Review of Books</em> and <em>The Paris Review</em>/novelist Nathaniel. While we can see how that article (like many other Style section pieces) could rub some the wrong way, we don't think it really merits a feature in the <em>Observer</em>, fun or not.</p>
<p>Nonetheless, we appreciate the ideas almost as much as we appreciate the typewritten note. It's like a tweet from an earlier time, before the Internet, when the only way to express oneself was by firing up the old Olivetti, affixing a stamp to an envelope and corresponding with the editor of a given publication.</p>
<p>So type away. We'll read it. And maybe even blog about it.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
		<wfw:commentRss>http://observer.com/2013/01/our-favorite-letter-to-our-editor/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
		<slash:comments>0</slash:comments>
	
		<media:content url="http://0.gravatar.com/avatar/3ae4eb6e34505b4a8a98a3342b6c0f35?s=96&#38;d=identicon&#38;r=G" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">ksmokeobserver</media:title>
		</media:content>

		<media:content url="http://nyoobserver.files.wordpress.com/2013/01/photo-1.jpg?w=300" medium="image">
			<media:title type="html">photo (1)</media:title>
		</media:content>
	</item>
	</channel>
</rss>
