Critics also highlighted the newer tower's contrast with the older base. A writer for "Newsday" stated that the tower demonstrated "the effect of one era's modern architecture giving birth to another's", saying that Foster's tower "seems to float above and behind the original shell." "The Financial Times" wrote, "There is no attempt to harmonise or grow organically from Urban's oddity [...] On the other hand the old building has not been ignored—quite the opposite." Nicolai Ouroussoff of "The New York Times" said, "Past and present don't fit seamlessly together here; they collide with ferocious energy", characterizing the Hearst Tower's design as "deeply comforting". Architectural writer Paul Goldberger, in "The New Yorker", praised the Hearst Tower as the "most beautiful skyscraper to go up in New York" since 140 Broadway was completed in 1967. Not all critics were positive: Robert Campbell wrote in "Architectural Record" that the tower was designed "as if the Pentagon, with its usual deftness of touch, had confused its maps and located this chunk of military hardware in Manhattan instead of Florida."