The Times reports today that Larry Summers has invested in a new video-centric website called Big Think, ostensibly a "YouTube for ideas."

Big Think (www.bigthink.com) mixes interviews with public intellectuals from a variety of fields, from politics, to law to business, and allows users to engage in debates on issues like global warming and the two-party system.

[Calling all editors: Spot the grammatical error in that sentence.]

The site was started by Harvard alums Peter Hopkins and Victoria Brown, both former bookers on the Charlie Rose Show.

The Times reports that Hopkins finagled a meeting with Summers by convincing his assistant to put him on the schedule, and that after a year, Summers ponied up a five-figure sum.

“I’ve had the general view that there is a hunger for people my age looking for more intellectual content,” said Mr. Summers, who resigned as Harvard president in 2006 after making controversial comments about the lack of women in science and engineering. “I saw it as president of Harvard when I saw C.E.O.’s come up to my wife and want to discuss Hawthorne.” (His wife, Elisa New, is a professor of English at Harvard).

Sounds like an interesting site, and I wish it well. But I also wish that the Times, which has rhapsodized about Larry Summers for years now, would adopt a little more skepticism when it comes to his doings.

For example:

1) Does a five-figure investment really justify putting Summers front and center in the story? Wouldn't it be nice to know, as Times reporter Tim Arango does not appear to, what the total capitalization of the site is?

2) I'm sure that many people Larry Summers' age are looking for intellectual content. Are they really looking for it on the web? Be honest: Would you watch a five-minute interview with Pete Petersen? Or John McCain on the question, "Is ethanol overhyped?"

3) Could Larry Summers name two of the multiple CEOs who asked his wife about Hawthorne ?

4) A three-second Google search shows that Hopkins was a "Weissman scholar" at Harvard—he interned at NBC News in London—and apparently met Summers at an event for the scholarship's beneficiaries. Probably worth mentioning.

5) It's also probably worth mentioning that the real, relevant connection here is not Harvard, it's the Charlie Rose Show, on which Summers has appeared numerous times.

6) The Times might also have mentioned that Summers was one of the founding contributors to "Open University," the New Republic's academic blog, and something one might consider a forerunner to Think Big. Why is it worth mentioning? Because from all appearances, Open University is a complete dud—the last post there was five days ago—and as far as I can tell, LHS has not written for it once. Seems relevant, right?

So, interesting story, poorly reported. The New York Times, it seems, can not help but dance to whatever tune Larry Summers plays.