Veteran Arts Writer Carol Vogel Resigns from the New York Times

Ms. Vogel will continue to write for the Times and pursue projects beyond the paper.

Carol Vogel with Adam Weinberg at the Whitney Museum Whitney Biennial opening in 2012. Photo: Leandro Justen, courtesy Patrick McMullan
Carol Vogel with Adam Weinberg at the Whitney Museum Whitney Biennial opening in 2012. Photo: Leandro Justen, courtesy Patrick McMullan

As Art Basel in Miami Beach opened its doors today to an onslaught of press and VIPs, the news heard in the aisles was that veteran New York Times arts reporter Carol Vogel had resigned. Ms. Vogel has subsequently confirmed the news in an email to artnet News.

Here is Ms. Vogel’s statement to artnet News:

As I’m sure you have probably read, the Times is offering voluntary buyouts and for those of us who have been here a while, it’s a good deal. So after much soul-searching I have decided to take management up on the offer and resign. (I am joining quite a list of well-known bylines.)

‪I still plan to write and work on some projects I have been wanting to pursue for ages but never had the time because writing for a daily newspaper is all-consuming. It’s exciting to finally take a leap into the unknown and to see what other opportunities arise.

Ms. Vogel is known for having the inside scoop on major arts stories and for her column Inside Art, which often breaks news in the art world and is followed closely by arts writers each Thursday when it is published.

But as recently as late July, this past summer, there were reports that Ms. Vogel, who joined the staff of the Times in 1983, had plagiarized the writing of other arts writers in crafting her stories. The news first surfaced in an article in Mediabistro’s FishbowlNY, which claimed that Ms. Vogel’s writing, for her story on Piero di Cosimo entitled “A Renaissance Master Finally Gets A Showcase,” had allegedly mirrored that of a Wikipedia entry on the artist. So much so that it spawned an investigation by the Times and got a response from that paper’s public editor Margaret Sullivan. In a piece on July 30, Sullivan wrote there was “little dispute about the claim,” and further stated, in part:

In the case under review at The Times, an isolated instance of rewriting Wikipedia is not, in my opinion, a firing offense. Something like that probably warrants a written warning or a short suspension. (By the way, I have no vote on this as public editor, and no involvement in the process.) But a widespread pattern is a different matter altogether.

Ms. Vogel clarified in a follow-up email to artnet News that she would continue writing both for the Times as well as pursue projects outside the paper. We wish Ms. Vogel luck on her future endeavors.

Follow artnet News on Facebook.

Share