margaret sullivan's right.because i'm not promoting a book. >> yeah, we'll find out what the public editor thinks of that, promoting a book instead of breaking news. >> that's true. i should be finding who wrote that -- no, look. i mean, if -- it creates a lot of complicated decisions, you know, up the tree. here, i will punt. i don't want know. these decisions will be made at some point. i don't know how hotly they're pursuing that anymore than "the washington post" -- >> i really believe that -- i think that if the story -- i believe that if "the times" reporters are able to determine, independently, who this person is, i can't imagine anyone at "the new york times" pulling them back from running that story. i think it would have to be sent to the lawyers and i know it would be. but, i think the lawyers would find a way to make it publishable. and that would be the right thing. >> all right. but i got to ask you an ethics question, just and it's the last question. this is what i'm struggling with. if this per

margaret sullivan who is probably the best known probably in the u.s. before she moved to the post she ran. we tend to think that president trumps attacks on the press which we are so public we tend to think that that's our our biggest problem but i actually don't think it is i think the biggest problem is the demise and the troubles of local newspapers and local journalism when you get out into rural areas there are whole swaths of the country that don't have any news coverage. news. a lot of the shade the less newspaper coverage is available parts of the u.s. and now barista of daily newspapers and independent journalists there's no one to hold public officials or businesses accountable so if there are people who want to you know steal from the public till or do something that's corrupt or do something that's just shady it's a lot easier to do it when there isn't a news organization around to keep them honest it's not happening in the u.s. it's happening in the u.s. definitely i mean the problem with it is we don't know what we don't know you know the

the internal feud within the paper has compelled former times public editor, margaret sullivan to tweet, it's a good day not to be the public editor of the new york times. sullivan was asked on twitter by a colleague, what would you say? she she replied, "i would carefully talk to all parties and then come to a crushingly tough, but fair conclusion. silly." the times did respond this epg to the backlash in a statement to cbs news it says: we're incredibly proud to publish this piece adding significant value to the public's understanding to what is going on in the frump administration from someone in a position to know. jeff. ro great tweet >> glor: great tweet from mellivan. all right, jericka duncan, outside times headquarters, thank you. judge brett kavanaugh was uressed today on issues from abortion to presidential power. senators will soon vote on whether he gets a seat on the supreme court where he could shape u.s.vaugh! >> no on kavanaugh! >> reporter: there were protesters... >> you work for us! we don't work for you! >> reporter: but the senators questioning judge brett kavanaug