This image was lost some time after publication.

We suspect we're in the minority on this, but we continue to think Times chief Bill Keller gives great staff memo.

In today's post-Millerpalooza missive, Keller, we think, does a masterful job of dutifully toeing the company line while also openly acknowledging — and accepting, even — his staff's grumblings about the handling of this most recent low point in the paper's 154-year history.

We found a few particularly nice touches, from his I- know-this-isn't-over-despite-Arthur's-quote-in-the- Journal opening to his I-really-think-we-did-the-right- thing-to-defend-our-reporter-even-if-Judy's-a-bad- example ending.

Want to read the whole thing? Then jump.

To: Newsroom@nytimes.com
Subject: MESSAGE FROM BILL KELLER
Sent: 10/17/2005 01:10 PM

Colleagues:

I wanted to add a personal postscript to the fine, rigorous piece of journalism we published Sunday.

Actually,"postscript" implies an end, and I suppose it's too early to hope for that just yet.

But in the world beyond the media water coolers, the focus will shift back to more momentous stories — possibly including the leak investigation in which, for all we know, this paper's ordeal may have been more a digression than a climax. With any luck all of you can resume your undistracted, full-throttle pursuit of putting out the best news report in the world. This is not to say that you should withhold your questions. You are welcome to e-mail your immediate concerns to Jill or John, and we will get you answers to you as best we can.

This week and next I'm visiting our correspondents in Asia. By telephone and e-mail, I intend to remain, along with the publisher, very much a part of our decision making. When I get back I'll still have some important loose ends to tie up from this episode. In the meantime, my thanks to all of you who have suffered patiently (and impatiently) the inherent frustration of trying to cover a story in which we became a subject, my thanks to Jon Landman and the reporters who did us proud on Sunday, and my warmest thanks to the many of you who have expressed solidarity in a time of anxiety.

If I had it to do over, there is probably much I'd do differently, and we can chew on the lessons learned when I return, but I hope my first instinct — and the paper's — would still be to defend a reporter in the line of duty, even if the circumstances lack the comfort of moral clarity.

Best, Bill