News Dennis Overbye, NY Times Columnist to retire

  • Thread starter Thread starter diogenesNY
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Science
AI Thread Summary
Dennis Overbye, the New York Times' "cosmic affairs correspondent," is retiring after 25 years of impactful science journalism. His columns were known for their factual density and readability, effectively bridging complex astronomical concepts with engaging prose. However, some readers noted that certain articles occasionally felt incomplete, often due to editorial cuts that removed essential details. Despite these minor shortcomings, Overbye's ability to write lyrically about astronomy without becoming overly sentimental was appreciated. His final column can be accessed through the New York Times link provided.
diogenesNY
Messages
230
Reaction score
259
Dennis Overbye, New York Times columnist and its “cosmic affairs correspondent” is retiring after 25 years.

He contributed regular columns for The New York Times and maintained an unusually and impressively factual density to otherwise highly readable science journalism.

Occasionally his articles seemed slightly incomplete or missing a critical detail or two in order for the article to make sense as a whole. These instances, however, were usually the result of some overzealous editor who would clip out some critical word or datum leaving the article less than clear. I was always able to get some assistance and clarity from my PF friends who would help fill in the gaps of an otherwise well constructed article.

Dennis Overbye's current and final New York Times column.: https://www.nytimes.com/2024/12/20/...6242&user_id=3ffbe6c78eb3f50a57e1995fc26ec5a3
 
  • Like
Likes berkeman, AlexB23 and BillTre
Physics news on Phys.org
I liked several of his articles. Have not seen any for a while since I dropped the Times.
I thought he had a good ability to be kind of lyrical about astronomy without getting too cheesy.
 
  • Like
Likes AlexB23 and diogenesNY
diogenesNY said:
Occasionally his articles seemed slightly incomplete or missing a critical detail or two in order for the article to make sense as a whole. These instances, however, were usually the result of some overzealous editor who would clip out some critical word or datum leaving the article less than clear.
Yeah, I once had my line about a "refereed paper" changed to "referred paper" by an editor, who refused to change it back even when I pointed out what I was talking about. Sigh.
 
Last edited:
Back
Top