What value do New York Times arts reviewers place on web writing? It depends on which one you read. Two reviewers came to very different conclusions on the same page of last Friday's paper.

On the right-hand side of page E29, book reviewer Michiko Kakutani, in a scathing pan of Ron Rosenbaum's new book, The Shakespeare Wars, wrote:

The reader who manages to finish this very long book has no doubt that Mr. Rosenbaum knows a lot about Shakespeare—and clearly loves the playwright's work—but his disorganized, free-associative efforts to show off his expertise belong on a Shakespeare blog, not between the covers of a book.

Burn.

But on the left-hand side of the page, television reviewer Virginia Heffernan quotes extensively from a message board in her review of To the Ends of the Earth:

[The British] chronically complain about the BBC's esteemed haute television series, and their complaints are tart. Now we can enjoy their comments along with the show: the BBC, whose "To the Ends of the Earth," a three-part drama about a vexed voyage from England to Australia, comes to PBS on Sunday night, has introduced a reader-review feature to its Web site.

Several viewers find much to admire in "To the Ends of the Earth"—an adaptation of the brutal and exciting trilogy by William Golding that, like his "Lord of the Flies," describes the Hobbesian arrangements made by men stripped of civility, this time aboard a ship—but others don't believe it for a second. Capt. David G. Williams of North Wales, where they know from seafaring, is an especially astute detractor.

"Wholly amateurish and totally unconvincing," he begins. "Below decks this ship looks more like the interior of a hen coop. Why are the boats on the well deck? The boats too are better suited to Sunday afternoon on the park pond being far too small for their intended purpose, and are we really expected to believe that a ship in so little wind had hardly any sail set? Hammocks were only stowed in nettings when an engagement was imminent. Look at the puny stern windows, and saloon chairs should be fastened to the deck with bottlescrews etc. etc."

It's hard to stop quoting. "The stewards are very good," Captain Williams allows. "But no ship would carry your pathetic sailors for ballast. The motion of this so called 'ship' in a seaway is also ridiculous."

…

Having spent no time on decrepit wooden warships, which is what this stage set is meant to be, I absolutely concede rank to Captain Williams about the "puny stern windows" and saloon chairs being "fastened to the deck with bottlescrews etc. etc." Puny stern windows and stinting on bottlescrews? Oh, come on. Get it right, "Masterpiece Theater."

So apparently web writing isn't worthy of a book, but is good enough to quote extensively and "concede rank" to. Perhaps this can be partially explained by Ms. Heffernan's webby background, from Slate.