Dan Baum finally finished his Twittering about getting fired from the New Yorker. I gotta say: I admire that guy’s writing (or his and his wife’s, as I guess is the case), but I’m not sure how much I can sympathize with him on this one.

First of all, he gets three pieces killed in a year? That’s a lot, given that the typical New Yorker writer (of longform narrative journalism, at least) probably only writes four to six stories a year, if that.

Second, he accuses Remnick of “bigfooting” him when he says he’s coming to New Orleans after Katrina??  Jesus. That’s not just dumb office politics, as Baum portrays it; it’s literally Bushian in its insensitivity to the size of the story he’s witnessing. Would Baum have said that if he were in New York on 9/11? Or today, about the financial crisis? Those two, together with Katrina, have been the decade’s three giant defining stories*, and to suggest to your editor that he’s “bigfooting” you by coming down is basically to declare that you think your own career is more important than history.

__

* American stories