I have this theory that is contrary to all the bloviating about how the bad management is responsible for plummeting subscriptions to the Los Angeles Times.
In short, it’s really the multimedia that is keeping people from needing to read the newspaper. Your average joe doesn’t give a crap about who’s editing the editorial pages so much as that you can get reader specific news 24/7, for free, by way of the internet, and breaking news any time by watching CNN or Fox.
Yes, this argument is obvious, but still pretty much ignored by every other blogger who has an opinion on what’s wrong with the Los Angeles Times.
All that said, it doesn’t mean that our local paper can’t be improved and critiqued. Which of course is the subject of the question of the week:
If you were suddenly appointed an all powering helm of the L.A. Times, how would you manage it? Who would you hire to manage the different sections? Any other fundamental changes?
Feel free to comment below, or leave a lengthier reply on your own blog (just drop us a note in the comments so we know to check). And in grand meme form, I’m tagging some local bloggers in hopes they’ll reply: L.A. City Nerd, Michael “Mayor Sam” Higby, and Zach Behrens of LAist. (I would have also tagged Amy Alkon, but she’s already given her opinion on the subject.)