A couple thoughts after a busy week:

Once again I find myself writing about journalism and covering the news — this after the New York Times published an anonymous op-ed piece from a purported senior official in the White House that was critical of President Trump.

Given the day-to-day, week-to-week circus that can be the Trump White House, the fact that one of his team is disloyal and doesn’t respect the president’s ability is not news. As I’ve written before, Trump deserves the criticism he receives over political gaffes, a lack of preparedness concerning any number of issues and his almost gleeful use of narratives that are not always based in fact.

And he also deserves criticism for the quality of many of the people with which he’s surrounded himself.

But this issue regarding an anonymous column is just as much about the New York Times, an institution that cheapened itself by snatching a piece of low-hanging fruit in its daily combat with the Trump administration.

Mr. Rosenberg, my college newspaper advisor whose first name I never learned, taught me that a paper should never — EVER — print an anonymous column or letter to the editor. The credibility of any newspaper, be it a college weekly, a small daily or a giant like the NYT, above all, owes transparent truth to its readers on the editorial page.

Many times members of the community — municipal or local business employees, potential whistle-blowers, school employees, etc. — have asked me to print letters to the editor anonymously. I have never agreed, always explaining that our credibility at the paper — my credibility as an editor — is too important.

Take the op-ed, excerpt from it, and present the views of the writer in a news story — with the caveat that the source wished to remain anonymous. Newspapers do this all the time and, while not ideal, it’s completely acceptable.

Clearly, the NYT ran the op-ed as a sensational dig at the president, in what smacks as a cheap stunt to pander to its anti-Trump readers.

Now, perhaps more than at any time before, American journalism shouldn’t resort to cheap stunts.

Leave that to the politicians, such as posturing hacks like Sen. Cory Booker.

BEFORE HIS SUPPORTERS sprain their hands slapping former NFL quarterback Colin Kaepernick on the back for his conviction and being the face of a movement in sports for social justice, they might do well to recall that, hoping to get back in the league as a player, he had promised that he would not take a knee during the national anthem.

When there were no takers among NFL front offices for his mediocre talents, it was back to the front lines of the struggle.

He sued the league, claiming collusion to keep him unemployed, and most recently he signed a promotional deal with Nike, whose coldly cynical calculations assuredly are more about a marketing opportunity than they are about justice for anyone.

We hear a lot from ex-athlete commentators on ESPN about how current athletes “just want to get their money” or “it’s just business” when a player leaves for free agency or holds out for a bigger deal.

So why should it be any different for NFL owners to take a look at Kaepernick and his underwhelming QBR in the 40s — and the fact that at least half their paying fans utterly despise him — and decide to take a pass?

It’s just business, indeed.

Meanwhile, Nike sees business opportunity in hitching a wagon to a black ex-athlete/activist as it panders to the minority and youth market in the U.S., a demographic that buys shoes and sports apparel in excess to its population percentage — and in excess to its ability to afford it.

“Believe in something … even if it means sacrificing everything.” That’s the sanctimonious theme to Kaepernick’s Nike deal.

First, Nike cashes in in great part on the sacrifice of families who can ill-afford to pay for those $200 or $300 sneakers — made for a fraction of the cost in overseas factories — that their kids just gotta have.

Believe in something? Just laughable.

Sacrifice?

There are little American flags standing at gravestones, here and there in the landscape of this nation, marking the resting places of those who did believe in something — something more than selling ridiculously overpriced shoes.

And they really did sacrifice everything.

(Jim Eckstrom is executive editor of Bradford Publishing Co. His email is jeckstrom@oleantimesherald.com.)