And You Read the LA Times Because…?

COMMENTS (22)

• The Pennysaver has more substance than most major newspapers these days. It’s all part of the corporate masterplan to push everything online where there are no rules or retractions and destroy newspapers, thereby making it easier for the powers-that-be to get away with their crimes. If taxpayers can be forced to bail out corrupt Wall Street banks, then we can bail out newspapers. A free and open press is essential to democracy.

  Comment by Edward R. Rooney — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 3:26pm PST  Reply to this post

• Even with shrinkage, the L.A. Times is a great source of info @ our city & its cultural scene. (Not to mention local & world newz.) You should see the Sacramento Bee – a newspaper of record & it’s practically non-existent!

  Comment by Pam Munro — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 3:48pm PST  Reply to this post

  • What the LA Times does have is great photographers – I am constantly amazed by the quality of its news photos. LA Weekly has better coverage on the city’s cultural scene. LA Times entertainment coverage is embarrassing. For contrast, look at New York Times and Guardian UK.

    Comment by reader — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 6:45pm PST  Reply to this post

• Idiocracy. Runs. Rampant. There, I said it all in three words.

  Comment by yvonnjanae — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 4:26pm PST  Reply to this post

  • You could have said it without the useless periods, too.

    Comment by Ron — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 11:32pm PST  Reply to this post

• Hey Sherry-babe, WIll you be cutting my subscription costs by 10%????

  Comment by Burrrbank — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 4:28pm PST  Reply to this post

• They are slowly adapting to the new world. Soon, all the articles will be the perfect length for a blog post. Maybe tweet-sized by the time they’re finished.

  Comment by snarky mcfadden — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 4:33pm PST  Reply to this post

• A least it will fit the bottom of the bird cage better.

  Comment by Above and Below — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 4:40pm PST  Reply to this post

• That’s okay. Reduce the content by as much as you want. Just don’t stop publishing huge Ru Paul photos anytime soon. No one reads the L.A. Times anyway. With the average I.Q. of its readers hovering around 90 and falling, its readership just looks at the pictures.

  Comment by celebrityworshipsucks — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 4:57pm PST  Reply to this post

• The LA Times continues to shrink like a cheap 100% cotton T-shirt coming out of the dryer for the first time. Sadly, the T-shirt is more fun to read.

  Comment by Rip M 2 Shreds — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 8:21pm PST  Reply to this post

  • You spend all that time in a laundromat and that’s all you get out of it?

    Comment by Ron — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 11:33pm PST  Reply to this post

• a once great newspaper when the Chandlers ran it. Its The Propaganda Times now. Haven’t subscribed nor read since the late 80′s

  Comment by Jon — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 9:16pm PST  Reply to this post

  • If you haven’t read it in 20 years, how do you know it’s just propaganda? From what Nikki says?

    Comment by Really? — Tuesday February 2, 2010 @ 12:53am PST  Reply to this post

• Did you see this? The LA Times is edited by Rip Torn!
  Who knew?

  Comment by jeff prescott — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 9:53pm PST  Reply to this post

• I think the Chicago Tribune took it over just so they could destroy it….

  Comment by think ink — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 10:41pm PST  Reply to this post

• It’s been ten years since I left New York and came to Los Angeles. In that time, I think I’ve looked at the L.A. Times twice. No need to mince words here. It’s a terrible paper with less than desirable content that seems thrown together using a pasta/wall formula. And that dreadful website….

  It could shrink right off the face of the earth for all that I care…

  Comment by Duane — Monday February 1, 2010 @ 11:25pm PST  Reply to this post

  • Maybe so, but they’re the reason the Toyota mess got covered so as a Toyota owner, I’m glad the reporters are still doing their jobs. But you’re free to just read Nikki for investigative reporting, if you’d like.

    Comment by you don't say — Tuesday February 2, 2010 @ 12:58am PST  Reply to this post

  • Thanks for letting us all know you’re from New York. That’s really fascinating and relevant. Perhaps you could also explain how difficult it is now to find a decent bagel or slice of pizza before you go.

    Comment by DK — Tuesday February 2, 2010 @ 11:25am PST  Reply to this post

    • Ditto! Just what we need another New Yorker bashing LA.
      Go home!

      Comment by Slurreal — Tuesday February 2, 2010 @ 5:19pm PST  Reply to this post

• The reason the LA TImes is belly up is that it no longer gives us the news. It gives us propaganda spewed so far from the left that it no longer makes sense to the “common man.” If someone with money bought that paper and actually wrote about the news in an unbiased fashoin the paper would be read. Why is that so obvious to me and yet the powers that be can’t see it? I guess ivory towers have no windows.

  Comment by PB — Tuesday February 2, 2010 @ 8:33am PST  Reply to this post

• Let’s just hope that they won’t get rid of the news on where Lohan had lunch!!! Oh please, NO!! I MUST know how the celebrities drink their coffees!!!

  Comment by njames — Tuesday February 2, 2010 @ 11:04am PST  Reply to this post

• I agree with DK. If you don’t like it, leave.

  Comment by Joseph — Tuesday February 2, 2010 @ 4:09pm PST  Reply to this post