New editor of The Times must find a role for the paper. (Perspective).

A word of warning. This column is about The Times so, to be like Caesar's wife, I must declare that I write a weekly column for its arch-rival, The Daily Telegraph (City pages, Tuesdays, if you're interested).

With that out of the way, let's attend to Dominic Mills the main business, which is the legacy that Peter Stothard, who departs as editor after almost ten years, leaves his successor -- whoever that may be. Let's start with Rupert Murdoch's valedictory salute to Stothard: "As editor since 1992, Peter led The Times through its greatest period of growth for a century."

Hmm. Well, up to a point, Lord Copper. While it is certainly true that, under Stothard, sales of The Times have grown from 377,000 to 710,000, this was largely achieved by a revolutionary price-cutting campaign. Those so minded could conclude that these extra sales have been "bought". On the other hand, The Times has at least hung on to many of its new readers, which is not something that many newspaper promotion campaigns can boast. At the time, I thought the price cutting wouldn't last or work, and I was wrong.

However, if winning readers was one aim of price cutting, what else did it aim to do? Answer: wound The Guardian; mortally wound The Independent; and knock The Daily Telegraph below the crucial one million mark, making The Times the market leader. Stothard leaves with the job half done -- where the paper has been for the past few years. Sure, ...