Agenda journalism still reigns at the "OLD GRAY HAG ON SPRING STREET"??
.jpg)
If one were to judge from recent Los Angeles Times stories, or lack of, on outrages, protests,and demonstrations, what should of garnered the most in coverage in the strinking column inches of our local fish wrap??A. The April 15 Tea Parties??
B. KFI's Radio "John and Ken Anti-Tax Rally in Fullerton??
C. May Day Rally in Downtown Los Angeles??
If you are one of the graying scribes, still typing away in the remaining cubicles within the combined Editorial/Newsroom (or was it always that way when judging news and editorial content in the same given time period??), then you probably implore your editor to give maximum story budget to "C".
No wonder why your fishwrap is losing readership because you devote your remaining millimeters of newsprint to stories most readers have discarded as "P.R. Statements" that a majority could find highlighted on blogs, web sites, and debunk as bias journalism.
Your thoughts................
Labels: Los Angeles Times
Posted by Red Spot in CD 14 @ 5/03/2009 10:28:00 PM
11 Comments:
YOU ARE SO RIGHT. THEY BURY the important stories way in the back. Only David Z is saving that peiece of toliet paper. The internet is more pwerful then newspapers and local tv news. Soon LA Slimes will be dead
My gawd, even a THIRD GRADER knows what "strive" means. If you think the professional LATimes journalists give two shits about you, Wet Spot, you're more delusional than Zuma Mutt.
Zuma is is broke and hungry sleeping on the sidewalk.
David Z is god.
The rest of that paper is only good for by birds to crap on.
zuma is not broke and not hungry. that is just his gimmick to scam money. at least that is what I think. he has a van he lives in and he has lots of cup o noodles in there he gets at the 99 cent store where he is all the times.
I think it's so nice that Mr. Higby provides this forum for the developmentally disabled. Go, Red go!!
The so-called tea parties were non-news. Lots of reasons why. I'll still take the LA Times reporters over blogs like this. And no, I'm not with the LAT or even know anyone who is.
You're deluded. This paper is no longer a liberal bastion, although it has a handful of old lefties. It's now trying to compete for the blue-collar radio talk show vote, hoping they'll replace the affluent liberal-skewing people who have cancelled in droves as the quality of writing has gone down and the more experienced (often liberal- skewing) writers have been fired. It's the Titanic, plan not working, ship going down even faster.
May 04, 2009 9:08 AM
There is no truthful or accurate information in that comment at all.
The L.A. Times abandoned the suburbs and the San Fernando Valley under the Tribune Management. Lost 300,000 in circulation 2000-2008. Untold millions in revenue has been lost.
Old Tribune ownership cashed out and left a company with billions in debt and Sam Zell. Sam and his crew haven't a clue what they are doing. L.A. Times is bankrupt.
Can't compete against N.Y. Times and Wall Street Journal in the affluent readers.
Most(?) of L.A. Basin doesn't speak or read english. Bye, bye L.A. Times...
Reasons for the demise of the LAT:
**decades of liberal bias
**nearly as many decades of preference for national over local stories
**turning a blind eye to local government corruption (until now)
**decimation of classified ad revenue by Ebay, Craigslist, autotrader.com, etc.
**overwhelming debt from Tribune takeover
**abandonment of, if not outright hostility, towards the Valley
And no, 5/4/09@7:38am, the professional journalists don't care about what we think on this blog--if they did, they'd change their reporting and editing.
But we won't care when their sorry asses are on the unemployment line after "The Old Gray Hag on Spring Street" goes out of business.
Adios, a-holes!
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home