With the new year we report several changes at the Columbia Journalism Review. After eight years as editor of cjr, Suzanne Braun Levine has resigned. With the next issue, she will be succeeded by Marshall Loeb, editor, author, broadcast commentator, and columnist for Fortune magazine.

 In her tenure Suzanne has led the magazine to new visibility, credibility, and influence in journalism. She introduced new features, attracted new writers, strengthened the magazine's franchise, and reaffirmed its commitment to quality and excellence in journalism. We thank her for her years of service and dedication, and wish her well in the future.

 Marshall Loeb is one of journalism's most highly respected editors and writers, celebrated in the business for his energy and creativity. As managing editor of Money and then of Fortune, he lifted both magazines to new peaks of performance. We welcome him, and look forward to continuing to tackle the challenging editorial and economic issues confronting journalism and to cjr's becoming even more urgent, relevant, and useful.

 In yet another change, I am stepping down as dean of the Graduate School of Journalism at the end of this semester after eight and one half years. I will enthusiastically continue at Columbia as publisher of cjr and as a faculty member of the school.

 As has been said before, there is only one constant in life and that is change. But change in life and in the life of an institution invites a moment of reflection.

 As dean of the school, I have enjoyed many burdens, but I have also suffered many privileges, none more than being asked my opinion on just about anything. I grew up at a time when no one listened to children, came of age at a time when no one listened to women, and then went into the news business where no one listens to anyone.

 Then after twenty-eight years as a reporter, writer, and television producer, I became a dean, and overnight, it seemed, I was an expert. People, mostly other journalists, were asking my opinion on everything, not just about journalism. Of course, I could never admit that I didn't have one, and so by now I have committed many opinions.

 On the occasion of Walter Cronkite's eightieth birthday last month, I was asked: How is it that Walter Cronkite was the most trusted man in America in his day, and today surveys tell us that the only people less trusted than journalists are used-car salesmen and members of Congress?

 I actually had an opinion on that question, because the answer, at least in part, is "change" and on that, every journalist is expert. Change is our beat.

 Since Uncle Walter's time, the news business has changed. Megamergers and megamoguls have shifted the always delicate balance between the pursuit of profits and the pursuit of truth. Many journalists now must sell the news as well as tell the news.

 The technology of communications has changed. With the advent of cable, satellites, and computers, news sources have proliferated so that today we have some half-dozen competing twenty-four-hour news channels, not to mention the twenty-four-hour Internet with updates and deadlines every second, sometimes minus either sources or editors.

 And journalism itself has changed. News organizations and some journalists have transformed from their traditional role as watchdogs of power into institutions of power themselves with an ability, indeed, a susceptibility, to abuse that power.

 Finally, the public has changed. People have grown more knowledgeable - in large part thanks to the news media - and more cynical, undoubtedly because of the more aggressive and, too often, less civil behavior of journalists. The public has morphed from its historic mistrust of government and power, dating back to our revolutionary roots, to today when there is public mistrust of all authority, including the news media. Even if they looked avuncular, Uncle Dan or, for that matter, Aunt Diane would not be cool today (or would sound dissonant today).

 For thirty-five years, cjr has been tracking change in our business even as it has been changing itself. The magazine's continued existence has defied marketplace odds, like most magazines of ideas which follow the polestar of principle, not profits. cjr's vitality is testament to the thousands of working journalists - editors, writers, reporters, producers, publishers, broadcasters, and webmasters - who turn to our pages because they care. They care about journalism. They care about standards, ethics, performance, and the pursuit of ideals like excellence and truth. As important, cjr owes its financial fortitude to the health and independence of the Graduate School of Journalism and to funders who put their money where there values are.

 If not in life, or journalism, there is at least one constant at the Columbia Journalism Review, and that is the magazine's commitment to its mission as stated in the founding editorial: "To assess the performance of journalism, to help stimulate continuing improvement of the profession, and to speak out for what is right, fair, and decent."

 Even as the journalism changes, and the magazine changes, we look forward to continuing to fulfill that mission in this and every issue.

cjr  |  archive  |  resources  |  contact  |  search  |  subscribe