Arthur S. Brisbane, former reporter, editor, publisher and newspaper corporate executive, has been named the fourth public editor of The New York Times. He replaces Clark Hoyt.

At 59, he will spend the next three years on the job, planning to commute in some form from his home on Cape Cod. His first column is expected in September.

Brisbane agreed to participate in a Q&A with me Tuesday. He noted that readers remain the prime constituency for the paper, but he plans to listen to the blogosphere as well. He says his experience outside the newsroom will offer a good perspective, while noting he will not make critiques of the editorial page a primary focus.

*********************************

Q. Why did you choose to take this job, described by predecessors as among the most challenging?

A. Knowing it is a hurricane is not the same as standing and facing it. I made it a practice in my previous years of taking opportunities that come my way, even if it entails something different. It is not a repeat of anything I've done, although I think I will be able to draw from my past experience.

It is a really distinct kind of role and one that is important because it is The New York Times and it is a privilege to play the role. I hope I have the stamina.

I did meet with Clark, I know Clark from Knight Ridder. He was generous with his time. I learned the lay of the land and what I might expect. He emphasized that the volume of comment and criticism is both large and loud. A lot of that is amplified in the digital domain.

He emphasized that it is a reporting job in many respects and I think people respect that and expect it. If you are going to weigh in, you need to be sure of what you are saying.

Q. The New York Times comes under more attacks than ever in today's Internet age. Will you feel a need to respond to other news outlet complaints, and those from bloggers and web sites more than readers?

A. No, I would not feel obligated to respond more promptly or energetically to the blogosphere than I would to the readers of The New York Times. I would be interested to see what it's like. The readers of the Times are an incredibly important constituency. The blogosphere is a place where legitimate issues surface and I want to track all that and filter that, but I also understand that to the extent that people set themselves up as institutional foils for the sake of it, I suppose I would be mindful of those things.

I don't want to devote my time to engage in partisan political warfare. I want to be an independent, fair-minded voice addressing issues. It is not really so much who raises the issue, it is the legitimacy of the issue.

Q. Will your time as a Knight Ridder executive give you any more insight or sympathy for the paper's bottom line?

A. I am interested in the bottom line of the newspaper industry generally, but I don't think it is in my job description to worry about the bottom line. I think my experience in the corporate office and as publisher of the Kansas City Star did give me experience in dealing with issues from outside the newsroom. You are either inside the newsroom or you are not. When you are in the newsroom, it is hard to get perspective about how the outside sees you. When you are publisher, you gain perspective from outside the newsroom.

Q. What will be your initial areas of interest?

A. I am sure I will delve into the Internet, the speed of the Internet and propensity of people to make errors when they are pushing a tight deadline; all kinds of problems with ethics in journalism that come up, balance in stories. I am sure there are matters of balance in stories. That is the role of the public editor. It's an endless war.

Q. Do you think the public editor has any impact? In two of his biggest disputes with Executive Editor Bill Keller -- on the John McCain affair story and the assignment of Israel correspondent Ethan Bronner, whose son is in the Israeli military -- Keller rejected Clark Hoyt's criticisms.

A. I suppose that if I felt that nothing the public editor said was incorporated into the Times's actions I would think it was a hollow job. But that is not my impression. I do think that the public editor has his shot and there is nothing statutory about other's agreeing with the public editor voice. The strength of it is that it is an independent voice. There is no true subpoena power. There are limitations, but it is worthwhile.

Q. What do you think of the recent coverage of Connecticut Attorney General Richard Blumenthal's Vietnam claims and its criticism?

A. I am a little hesitant to jump into the controversies that occurred. I would be hesitant to jump in on that one.

Q. Will you have oversight of the editorial pages and how would you approach that?

A. Clark did weigh in there. It is a bit controversial because there is a view within the Times that the editorial page wasn't part of this mandate. I will go there and leave my options open. My sense is that the editorial page has a free swing at expressing its point of view. I would be open to the possibility of that, but that is not my primary focus. The public editor's basic role would be to comment and investigate on issues of news coverage.

Q. The Washington Post ombudsman does not oversee the editorial pages, what do you think of that policy?

A. I don't want to take issue with how The Washington Post is doing something. It is a different job title in a different organization.

Q. Have you been told anything is off-limits?

A. I'm struck by generally the open nature of it. Nobody has said don't go here, don't go there. No boundaries. Anything that the Times covers or doesn't cover. There is as much potential for the public editor to comment on stories that are not covered. It is fair game. The charter is that the public editor's reach is rather broad.

Q. Your three-year contract is the longest yet for a New York Times public editor. Did you request that or was it offered. Why?

A. It was their idea, I was fine with it. A piece of that is that it is an unusual position to fill and it would be nice to fill it once every three years.

Q. How will your approach differ from Clark Hoyt?

A. That is hard to say, Clark did a very good job. At this point I am going to start and regard him as a pretty good role model and see where the job takes me. I don't have at this point a plan that says this is what I am going to do differently.

Q. Some have said another white male in that role is not diverse. Your view?

A. All I can say is I am going to do the best I can and try to draw on my skills and my experience and try to perform well in the role. There is not much I can do about that question, I can focus on doing a good job.

Q. How will you utilize the Public Editor Blog?

A. I will do the blog, I will have to wade into that. There are probably some features of the work that are compatible with the blog, I will see what they are. I plan to use it as a complement.