Comments on: LA Times print cutbacks AGAIN

By: bustard

bustard — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 17:55:38 +0000

I ain’t wanting the rags to “run a paper in a such a way out of the goodness of their heart.” I want a paper that is not fishwrap fashioned as an airport novel. Loads of rags from abroad dole it out rather well without all the lifestyle crap, why not LAT?

By: tornadoes28

tornadoes28 — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 15:00:58 +0000

I don’t like how my fingers get all dirty from the news print.

If these “corporate overlords” run the paper in such a way out of the goodness of their heart, then they will go out of business.

By: bustard

bustard — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 09:32:59 +0000

A few decades ago there usta be seven daily papers in L.A. The end of that era was right round the time that Paul Conrad’s great political cartoons were no longer in LAT. To be sure, I would not miss it were it to disappear. I can only imagine that the LA Weekly’s porn and DT News’ real estate would fill the gap in a fashion that would hardly be noticed as different to the real world. After all, did not Russ Stanton not state, while at the OC Press Club a fortnight ago, that he was “not sure. . . we’re one of them anymore” in answer to a query about LAT being among the “nation’s big papers”?

And as a former New Yorker, I hafta state that that even in 2005, when last I lived in the city/outer boros, there were several new papers. Three I can name right off hand were am New York, the Sun and Metro. I still subscribe to the fantastic tab NY Observer, pick up the Times and Post at Famima (where I also get FT) and have daily delivered WSJ.

I find LAT on the subway once or month or so and give it a cursory glance to take in its watered down and all too late perspective. It is rather sad what the Lummis and Chandler families have allowed this rag to become. Look how long it took the Bancrofts to sell their holdings, and observe the new publisher of the Washington Post.

By: flowerofhighrank

flowerofhighrank — Fri, 01 Aug 2008 08:59:17 +0000

I love the Times; I loved it when we had 2 papers (you youngsters are too little to remember the Herald Examiner- it was a great paper, too). A real paper makes a city. I don’t want to lose the Times.

By: evan

evan — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 22:16:04 +0000

I never liked the Guide at all. The idea of the Thursday look ahead to the weekend started a while back–the Thursday Calendar section was printed like the Guide is now. It just seemed to be a weaker Weekly.

And the Magazine is going back to weekly now (so instead of a monthly issue of advertising-run crap, we get it weekly!).

I hate Zell as much as anyone, but really, the Times has been deteriorating ever since the sale to Tribune. Remember when the publisher was a cereal executive?

By: frazgo

frazgo — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:32:03 +0000

I’m not an ex-NYer, but that doesn’t change that for better reporting and less bias it does a better job. Even they need balance so I check in on BBC to just to see how we look under a different microscope, one that isn’t directly involved in our messes.

By: Chal Pivik

Chal Pivik — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 21:00:25 +0000

frazgo, I know, I know — but I didn’t really want to go there. Ex-NYer here and it would be too easy. LAT is fixable, but also, obviously, killable too.

By: frazgo

frazgo — Thu, 31 Jul 2008 20:53:01 +0000

I gave up on them years ago.
NYT for my daily dose of news. Hell they even scoop LAT with local stuff from time to time.