The New York Times is one of the finest newspapers, if not THE best, in the world. It serves as a model for other papers to emulate, and the excellence of the paper’s news report indirectly helps the entire newspaper business.

Earlier this week, the Times’ executive editor, Howell Raines, and its managing editor, Gerald Boyd, resigned their prestigious positions. This followed the disclosure that a reporter by the name of Jayson Blair committed plagiarism and fraud in many of his stories over a six-month period. He “retired” a few weeks ago.

Many in the Times newsroom had cautioned both Raines and Boyd about Blair’s reporting over a period of time, and the warnings had not been acted upon by the two senior editors. In fact, Blair was given increasingly important stories to cover, and there was the belief Blair was in a privileged position because he was black and Raines and Boyd were carrying political correctness to an extreme, to the detriment of the Times.

The political correctness question is subject to debate, but the fact Blair was allowed to continue to report and, in the process, not meet standards expected of other Times reporters is a fact. Finally, he was allowed to resign rather than being fired, and eventually there was sufficient pressure on Raines and Boyd that they, too, resigned.

News of this development shocked many, but once done, others in the Times newsroom were quick to vent their unhappiness about the manner in which Raines and Boyd had run the news operation and what seemed, in the minds of many, to be their arrogant manner.

This whole scene has been a tremendous embarrassment for the Times, and there are those who were quick to suggest the deceit by Blair should cause Times readers not to be so trusting of what they read in the paper.

Over the years, the Times and many of its people have indeed acted in a somewhat arrogant manner because they wanted it known they were working for a truly outstanding newspaper, a newspaper that has a right to do a little strutting and give off an air of superiority. Many others in the newspaper business, particularly at some of the nation’s largest papers, didn’t hide their dislike of the way Times people behaved and the notion the Times was a better paper than all the rest. Some of this was envy and some was based on intense competition within the news and newspaper business.

Now, the belief the Times was — or is — a paper that demands accuracy, fairness and objectivity in its news columns has been damaged.

Due to this, the Times management, principally Publisher Arthur Sulzberger Jr., accepted the resignation of Raines and Boyd. The health of and respect for the paper is the top priority of the Sulzberger family, which has owned the controlling interest in the Times for years. Readers may disagree with the paper’s editorial position, which usually is on the liberal side of political and social issues, and they can differ with various Times columnists, but the news report MUST be accurate and balanced.

The Blair matter clearly reflected a breakdown in the newsroom, and this could not be tolerated. A few weeks after Blair, another Times reporter, Rick Bragg, who was awarded a Pulitzer Prize in 1996, resigned from the paper after it was discovered he used the work of an uncredited free-lancer in a story about Florida oystermen.

The Times tries to demand the best of its reporters, and in the paper’s reporting. They seek the truth about individuals, businesses and governments on which they report. It’s a two-way street. Accuracy and truthfulness cannot be demanded and expected from those they report on if accuracy and truthfulness aren’t demanded from those who do the writing.

This practice and philosophy is not limited to the Times operation but should be expected of all those engaged in the news business.

There are likely to be many jokes about the Times by those in the entertainment business and serious criticism by those who do not like the Times or its editorial positions. Nevertheless, in the minds of many, the Times remains a great newspaper with various writers claiming it is the world’s most credible source of information.

There is, indeed, a commitment by the Sulzberger family to do whatever is necessary to justify this lofty and important position and, although the Blair and Bragg situations are extremely embarrassing and disappointing, this writer is confident Sulzberger and those in the news operation will redouble their efforts to have the Times continue to be the nation’s finest example of complete and responsible journalism. They will step up what they expect of their reporters and editors. The nation is fortunate to have a family such as the Sulzbergers running this important paper.

Another positive spin-off of this unfortunate situation is that officials at most responsible newspapers probably have used it to remind their respective staffs of the importance of fair and accurate reporting.

Some citizens may think too much fuss is being made about the retirement or firing of several Times reporters and editors, but it is essential in our form of government that the public be well-informed and that those who have the privilege of doing business under the protection of the First Amendment carry out their responsibilities in a manner that merits the respect and trust of the public.