I'm a newspaperman, or was for 44 years, and it's painful to see what's happening.
My paper gets thinner and thinner and the staff gets smaller and smaller to the point people who work at the Daily News and people who read it wonder if it can survive. It's happening all over the country as advertising revenue dries up and it happened today, again, at the L.A. Times.
The Times' announced today that it will cut the space in the paper by 15 percent and lay off 150 editors and reporters, about 17 percent of its staff. It will bring the total editorial staff to about 700, compared to the peak of 1,200 a few years back.
For those who lose their jobs -- and I had to look a lot of them in the eye when I told them their jobs at the Daily News were being eliminated -- it's a personal catastrophe. There's not a whole lot of jobs that use the same skill sets. There's not a whole lot of jobs that are as much fun as newspapering.
Many papers will not survive the current problems or become little more than small, very local news operations online and in print.
But the Times is in a class by itself. A lot of its resources are tied up in news gathering in faraway places around the world, around the nation, that are expensive operations and of lower value to most readers. Despite its pretentions, The Times after all is not the New York Times or Wall Street Journal or Washington Post for that matter.
You can bet a lot of the cuts will come from out of town news operations and for the first time in nearly 50 years the Times will have to become a Los Angeles newspaper. I have said many times, not without some irony, that the Times is criminal in its neglect of L.A., its lack of vision for Southern California, and that it would be a better paper with 600 reporters and editors than it was with 1,200.
Few in the business agree with me and the whining and caterwauling you'll hear over these cuts will drown out all contrarian views.
My paper gets thinner and thinner and the staff gets smaller and smaller to the point people who work at the Daily News and people who read it wonder if it can survive. It's happening all over the country as advertising revenue dries up and it happened today, again, at the L.A. Times.
The Times' announced today that it will cut the space in the paper by 15 percent and lay off 150 editors and reporters, about 17 percent of its staff. It will bring the total editorial staff to about 700, compared to the peak of 1,200 a few years back.
For those who lose their jobs -- and I had to look a lot of them in the eye when I told them their jobs at the Daily News were being eliminated -- it's a personal catastrophe. There's not a whole lot of jobs that use the same skill sets. There's not a whole lot of jobs that are as much fun as newspapering.
Many papers will not survive the current problems or become little more than small, very local news operations online and in print.
But the Times is in a class by itself. A lot of its resources are tied up in news gathering in faraway places around the world, around the nation, that are expensive operations and of lower value to most readers. Despite its pretentions, The Times after all is not the New York Times or Wall Street Journal or Washington Post for that matter.
You can bet a lot of the cuts will come from out of town news operations and for the first time in nearly 50 years the Times will have to become a Los Angeles newspaper. I have said many times, not without some irony, that the Times is criminal in its neglect of L.A., its lack of vision for Southern California, and that it would be a better paper with 600 reporters and editors than it was with 1,200.
Few in the business agree with me and the whining and caterwauling you'll hear over these cuts will drown out all contrarian views.
For much of the Times reporting staff, the goal has been to win
Pulitzer Prizes, to win assignments in foreign, Washington or national
bureaus. Write it once, write it long, write it right has been the
operating ethic -- to which I've added, write it long after it makes
any difference.
I made my living telling the stories of what's happening in L.A. in real time, not a day or a year later, and I did it with staffs one-sixth or less than the Times. I admire a lot of the work done at the Times in the past and today but the impact of Times' journalism on L.A. is about one-sixth of what it could be if it used its might to stand for the greater good of the city and the region.
Newspapers should stand for something, something important, or they are just another form of entertainment. At least that's what I believe.
It isn't going to be easy with morale in the toilet. It isn't going to be easy because the entire newspaper industry has no more clue what to do today than it did in the 1950s when half the papers in the country went out of business.
But I believe it can be done. The Times can be an important part of our community life if it comes down from its elitist tower and focuses on L.A., its problems, its people and its culture. It won't be easy and it won't happen overnight but time is running short or there will soon be 600 reporters and editors left, then 500, then...
I made my living telling the stories of what's happening in L.A. in real time, not a day or a year later, and I did it with staffs one-sixth or less than the Times. I admire a lot of the work done at the Times in the past and today but the impact of Times' journalism on L.A. is about one-sixth of what it could be if it used its might to stand for the greater good of the city and the region.
Newspapers should stand for something, something important, or they are just another form of entertainment. At least that's what I believe.
It isn't going to be easy with morale in the toilet. It isn't going to be easy because the entire newspaper industry has no more clue what to do today than it did in the 1950s when half the papers in the country went out of business.
But I believe it can be done. The Times can be an important part of our community life if it comes down from its elitist tower and focuses on L.A., its problems, its people and its culture. It won't be easy and it won't happen overnight but time is running short or there will soon be 600 reporters and editors left, then 500, then...
Ron Kaye is the former editor of the Los Angeles Daily News where he spent 23 years helping to make the newspaper the voice of the San Fernando Valley and fighting for a city government that serves the people and not special interests.
Twice in recent years, Los Angeles Magazine listed Kaye among the city’s most influential people, specifically in the area of politics. Kaye has been variously described in the media as the “accidental anarchist,” “the Patrick Henry of the San Fernando Valley” and a “passionate populist.” He is now committed to
carrying on his crusade for a greater Los Angeles as an ordinary citizen. Previously, Ron worked at the Los Angeles Herald Examiner,
Associated Press, Cleveland Plain Dealer and The Australian as well as papers
in Fairbanks, Alaska and Yakima, Wash. He also wrote for Newsweek magazine, The Guardian in London and the Naitonal Enquirer.
Not all papers are struggling.
Content counts. The Wall Street Journal has increasing circulation, while the L.A. Times/Hoy and the Daily News lose more readers each month.
Perhaps the newspapers' owners should think about whether they have entrusted the right people with control over content.
Case in point: David Zahniser has been writing amazing articles documenting how companies and individuals that receive millions of dollars of City tax revenues and subsidies are throwing $1000 a head fundraisers for Villaraigosa.
Is this printed on page one, above the fold? No. Page two? No. It's not printed on any page, but is instead buried in an L.A. Times blog. And what's on page one instead? In the online edition, it's a picture of, and article about, swimming.
More muckraking, less fluff, might sell more papers. Just a theory.
More muckraking & less fluff. Yes, I agree with that.
A newspaper should not be afraid to tackle controversial issues, question authority, and ruffle feathers.
I'm a journalism student, and I especially love the op/ed pages. But I've been told by many that "You'll never get to be honest in your writing. You really think they're gonna let you tell the truth? Write something controversial?"
Then I joined the staff of a student newspaper and found that to be true, at least most of the time.
I do fear for the future of print journalism. It is one of the most noble and most important careers a person can possibly have. Without hard news and op/eds, society is doomed.
But despite the fact that I should probably look for some other line of work, I'm going to stick with journalism. At least until I figure out if I'm actually any good at it!
I think newspapers will survive.
"You can bet a lot of the cuts will come from out of town news operations and for the first time in nearly 50 years the Times will have to become a Los Angeles newspaper. I have said many times, not without some irony, that the Times is in criminal in its neglect of L.A..."
Amazing. That's almost exactly what I told the LAT early this morning when I logged on and was immediately hit with a polite request to answer a survey.
In the 'open comment' box I told them that their coverage of the Valley is abysmal, and reminded them that if the Valley stood alone, it has a population larger than that of 22 individual states, and if they didn't believe me they could Google it.
In the past they've tried several times to improve their S.F.V. coverage and failed each time.
Since it's next to impossible to get them to print a letter to the editor, I suggested that they have a comment box at the end of every story, editorial and op-ed...something I've suggested several times before.
They do have a place where one can comment on anything one wants, but I defy anyone to find it.
I like to hold a newspaper. There's something about physically holding print, with the photos and everything else you don't really get with the Internet.
But I only buy the newspaper when they get tough with issues in the city that matter. Journalism in LA seldom does that anymore. They have to earn the 50 cents, not just repeat what the mayor and city council wants us to hear in their press release. Get out in the streets and write.
Ron,
You are so right on about possibly smaller making the Times better. Now if Sam Zell would only see the wisdom in making you its editor to oversee he remaking of the Times into a truly great local newspaper. Ah, one can only wish.
Every night, before the Times goes to press, they should ask themselves, "What are the 3 top local stories on everyone's mind"? Those 3 stories should then go on the front page.
just try taking a crap with a laptop.
The LA Times has been totally irrelevant as far as any local issues for years, so it's hardly suprising what has happened to them. That's why I have always retained my subscription to the Daily News. We have plenty of other sources for national and international news. What we want out of our local paper is focus on the local issues that can be found no where else. And real local news and investigation, not fluff and public relations handouts for the mayor and other local politicians. There certainly is no lack of stories or issues to write about. Forget wasting money on all these bureaus elsewhere, write about our communities and do some real investigative journalsim.
how ironic, ron, that thinning the times's ranks would make it a better, more potent los angeles paper..
k
No mention of the effect the internet has had on newspapers. For my entire adult life (many decades) I subscribed to the LAT and the NYT. As soon as I heard the papers smack my front door around 6:00 a.m., I bounded out in my jammies and whisked myself and the papers back into bed for a good hour of reading.
Six years ago I purchased my first computer; and within months, I cancelled my subscriptions. I occasionaly buy the Sunday editions becau of the Sunday crosswords... the NYT Sunday crossword is the greatest!
One also has to take into consideration the fact that a goodly number of LA's denizens DO NOT SPEAK ENGLISH...(how is HOY doing, btw).
I admit...I do MISS the feel and the smell of the newsprint...and the fact that physically holding a newspaper lends itself to more concentration and tactile pleasure; however, today's papers ALL cater to immigrants...legal and ILLEGAL! I'm sick of the sob stories, the lies, and distortions. It's all so 'un-American'!
Bottom line...there is no news in today's world to entice me... a conservative, law abiding, anti-illegal immigration American Citizen...to spend a buck for a paper when the news is so damn depressing these days. I now welcome the online newspapers...I can just click away for an hour each morning and scan a dozen papers for a rare piece of good, non-biased, honest journalism! There's lots of good stuff out there...you just have to keep surfing...it's not in the LAT or the NYT!!!
PS...The LAT should get back in touch with the PEOPLE...not the millions of third world peasants who have no right to be here in the first place. The LAT, and indeed the MSM in general, has abandoned us...BIG MISTAKE!!! This is America...not Mexico! CA is already paying the price...but when will they ever learn? When it's too late...I suppose.