Firebrand Partners chief investment officer Scott Galloway writes 13-D letters that are straight out of Oprah: after acquiring a stake in Gateway, he wrote that "There is nothing wrong with Gateway that can't be fixed with what's right with Gateway." That investment ended in victory when Acer acquired the company.

Now Galloway is making headlines with his investment in the New York Times Co. (NYSE: NYT), and is sending similarly cuddly letters to top brass and attaching them to 13-Ds: "The New York Times is a great institution controlled by the Sulzberger family, and we have no illusion about, or desire to change, that fact."

For entertainment value, the Jerry Springer of activist investors, Dan Loeb, is much better. But according (subscription required) to the Wall Street Journal, Galloway's approach may work well: "Instead of being hostile, he offers what appears to be constructive criticism."

At the New York Times, though, I don't think it will work. Galloway has no leverage. A carrot and stick approach can work nicely -- "We're here to help but we'll get more hostile if necessary." But at the Times, Galloway is fighting for minority representation on an entrenched board.

If he gets on, he won't be able to do much unless the controlling family decides it wants to make the changes he's suggesting -- and if they do, there's no need for him to be on the board!

And if they don't listen to him? Nothing.