Meaning: The quote you provided is from Robert Scheer, a prominent journalist, and it sheds light on a significant issue within the realm of journalism and media. In this quote, Scheer is expressing his concern about a decision made by a publisher named Jeff Johnson, who took over the editorial pages of a newspaper. Johnson, who is described as an accountant from Chicago and lacking knowledge about the essence of newspapers, made the decision to remove a column. This decision is portrayed as a point of contention and raises questions about the impact of non-journalistic figures taking control of editorial decisions.

Scheer's quote highlights a fundamental struggle within the media industry - the clash between editorial independence and corporate influence. Throughout the history of journalism, maintaining the integrity and independence of editorial content has been a crucial aspect of the profession. The role of the editorial page is to provide a platform for diverse opinions and perspectives, creating a space for public discourse and critical analysis of important issues. When a publisher, who may not have a background in journalism or an understanding of its core principles, intervenes in editorial decisions, it raises concerns about the preservation of journalistic integrity.

The decision to remove a column, as mentioned in the quote, signifies a shift in the editorial direction of the newspaper. It implies that the publisher's priorities may not align with the traditional values of journalism, potentially prioritizing commercial or non-journalistic interests over the responsibility to provide a platform for diverse voices. This raises questions about the impact of such decisions on the quality and credibility of the publication, as well as the broader implications for the public's access to varied and independent perspectives.

The mention of Jeff Johnson as an accountant from Chicago is significant in the context of the quote. It emphasizes the fact that individuals with backgrounds outside of journalism are increasingly taking on influential roles within media organizations. While diversity of expertise can be valuable, the quote suggests that in this case, the lack of understanding about "what newspapers are supposed to be about" has led to a decision that contradicts the principles of journalistic integrity.

Moreover, Scheer's critique of the decision reflects a broader concern about the commercialization and corporatization of the media. The influence of publishers and corporate entities on editorial decisions has been a subject of ongoing debate within the journalism industry. The prioritization of commercial interests over journalistic values can compromise the independence and credibility of media outlets, ultimately affecting the public's access to reliable information and diverse viewpoints.

In conclusion, Scheer's quote serves as a poignant commentary on the challenges facing journalism in an era marked by corporate influence and editorial decision-making by non-journalistic figures. It highlights the tension between the traditional values of journalism and the impact of corporate and commercial interests on editorial independence. The concerns raised in the quote resonate with broader debates about the future of journalism and the imperative of upholding the principles of journalistic integrity in an evolving media landscape.