|
||
Editor & Publisher:
NEW YORK John Arthur has been forced out as Los Angeles Times executive editor.
Editor Russ Stanton explained in a posting at the paper's Web site, "John and I did not agree on the need for the just-announced masthead changes, and we differ on the best approach to reaching our goals."
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
" .... obituaries editor Jon Thurber will become managing editor, print. "
Talk about irony!
Obama Dismantles Free Press
One of the lessons history teaches us is that the further a country moves to the left, the more restrictive its press becomes. In a true Marxist state, the press is an extension of the government and acts as the party’s official mouthpiece. Competition, freedom to report accurately, and dissent are not allowed. Punishments for transgressions are swift and severe. The most egregious example of this was the former Soviet Union.
http://newsrealblog.com/2009/07/02/freedom-of-the-press-under-fire/
Yawn. More conspiracy stupidity.
Actually, it's beyond conspiracy stupidity- it's actually the far right blaming Obama for things they themselves have been doing for decades.
The AP and Rutgers did most of the damage to a free press, the "free market" destroyed the market newspaper in favor of megacorporations, and then the conservatives simply sent in their Rupert Murdoch, their propaganda chief, to gobble up the big pieces.
That's why you have to go on the internet for "real" news. The print media has been far right propaganda for over a decade.
this is a newspaper in dire need of objectivity
The L.A. Times became a state version of USA TODAY (California Today?) years ago.
Totally worthless as a city paper.
Only local daily city news source is the Daily News.
This is a big city with lots of daily big city problems with only one daily local paper that is woefully understaffed and under funded (the Daily News)
Pathetic
Yeah, they've basically forced out the competition. In 1989, the Herald went out of business when the LA Times forced small businesses to choose between them. LA Times wouldn't sell papers at your business if you also carried the smaller Herald. That was the end of that.
The LA Times has made one bad decision after another. This may be the final bad decision they make before turning into a complete rag.
I am sure that it was a sound management decision that was geared to drive the paper into the ground
That was my initial reaction too. So do you get a divorce because you can't agree on the shape of the wreath on the door at Christmas time?
Sarah Palin daze ...
I love the LAT. They still have some great reporters, photographers and editors.
All that is really needed is new management. Please. Won't Sam Zell please sell it to someone with a sense of journalism--and someone who CARES about keeping a quality paper in LA/the West?
Why would he do that after presiding over the Chicago Trib's descent into a rag?
The L.A. Times has an editor for #2s? How come I'm not surprise. Because that is a good description of that paper the last couple of years, an ink and paper version of a dookie dropped on the doorstep every morning.
There's more instability over at the L.A. Times than one would expect, with writers, editors and publishers coming and going on a commuter schedule.
What the Times needs now is a Otis Chandler, not a Mark Wilkes.
"Masthead changes"?! Please, what executive editor cares so much about how a logo looks that they'll quit over it? If they're going to come up with excuses for firing someone, the excuses should at least make some sense.
I remember after 9/11 when Abe Foxman started a boycott of the LA Times because the Times tried to reflect both sides of the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Abe's argument against the Times was that they tried to reflect symmetry on a issue Abe thought only needed the right side. That's what we got and even more of it under Sam Zell.
After 9/11 the reporting in the LA times was just awful. They editorialized in their news section, we were given a barrage of "Israel caused this" editorials without anywhere near the number of editorials giving other views. It seemed like every day they had guest editorials from Pakistan, Egypt, and others excoriating the U.S. It was very slanted reporting on that issue and the slant continues today on that and so many other issues. People are voting with their subscriptions.
The Los Angeles Times has been going downhill since Otis Chandler was forced out.
The Los Angeles Times.......... has Editors???
nope - but a lot of tingly-legged writers(?) fawning over bambam
The LA Times has been taken over by strangers. I have read this paper since the fifties and am a native of LA. It makes me sad that the owners do not understand that Los Angeles is NOT Chicago, or any other place. When Jonah Greenberg started was hired, that was enough for me! The Times never played these games and let l i a r s get paid. Not with my money. A LAT's guy called me to resubscribe. I told him after Jonah Goldberg was fired. He actually yelled at me about how I have to understand that things change. My arse I said!
Um, yeah, I detest their right-wing slant as well, but...first you call him Greenberg, then Goldberg. Makes it sound like all Jews look the same to you, if you know what I mean....I recommend you do what the LAT stopped doing: proof what you write, dude.
,many people leaving the newspapers, many people are stop reading them
|
||
Loading comments…
Posted: 07- 3-09 08:42 AM