'Vows' and the Mystery of the Missing Marriage

Did The New York Times give preferential treatment to a V.I.P. in its wedding pages?

I know, I know -- when has the Times ever not given preferential coverage to a V.I.P. in its wedding pages? Still, there are rules, and one of them got ignored in yesterday's "Vows" column about the nuptials of Fox News host Megyn Kelly.

Although Times practice calls for previous marriages to be mentioned in wedding announcements, there was nothing in yesterday's story about Kelly's prior union, which ended in 2006. Making the omission more glaring, Kelly only stopped using her married name -- Kendall -- a little over a year ago. (Indeed, some of her colleagues still haven't stopped using it.)

Robert Woletz, the editor of society news at the Times, confirms via a spokeswoman that the paper's policy is to spell out a newlywed's marital history. This instance, he says, was not a whitewash but a simple mistake: "We had originally included this information in our profile of Ms. Kelly. It was inadvertently dropped in one of the later edits."

Who says Fox News can't get a break from the Times?