Posted on 07/21/2005 9:17:48 PM PDT by BurbankKarl
Clouds over Baquet's L.A. Times * The New York Times story on the LAT editor change assumes that a troubling period lies ahead—and makes it clear that departing boss John Carroll has been spilling to his friends in the industry about the Tribune Company's desires to cut in Los Angeles. Former NYT Managing Editor Eugene Roberts, who hired Carroll at the Philadelphia Inquirer, says what the Tribune Company is proposing amounts to a "national tragedy." He adds that Carroll did not want to "preside over a major diminishment or the destruction of the L.A. Times as we now know it." William Marimow, the managing editor of National Public Radio who succeeded Carroll at the Baltimore Sun, said the Tribune's budget plans "would require dismantling much of what he'd done." Carroll and Dean Baquet, his replacement as Editor, had discussed leaving together rather than impose the Tribune's cuts [which are not detailed anywhere that I know of], writes NYT reporter Katharine Q. Seelye. Baquet, she reports, began "marathon discussions" with the Tribune in late June about his future and is believed to have spoken to other papers about a job. He tells Seelye that he got some assurances before taking the top LAT post:
"Well, I am staying," Mr. Baquet said in a telephone interview. "Obviously these are going to be tough times financially for this paper, and for all papers - every paper in America will have to tighten its belt. But the fact that I agreed to become editor means we will have the resources we need to keep getting better." Thursday's story by the L.A. Times staff media writer James Rainey confirms some of the intense behind-the-scenes wrangling that preceeded Wednesday's announcement:
Baquet's promotion to editor and executive vice president followed days of sometimes tense negotiations involving Baquet, [Publisher Jeff] Johnson and a corporate executive in Chicago. As recently as two weeks ago, Baquet threatened to leave the newspaper, according to several Times staffers who spoke to him. He told some of his top editors that a meeting with Tribune managers before the Fourth of July weekend had left him wondering whether he would have the freedom, and funds, needed to maintain the paper's worldwide news operation. Baquet eventually got the reassurances he wanted from the Times' corporate parent, said some of his close associates.
"Have I had disagreements with Chicago and others about the paper? Sure," Baquet said in his office Wednesday. "But obviously I feel like I am in sync enough with the people who own the joint" to have accepted the editor's job.
Howard Kurtz also frames his Washington Post story on the editor change as coming amid the threat of more budget cuts. Carroll acknowledges to Kurtz that financial pressures were a factor in his decision to leave. Baquet concedes there will be more belt-tightening, but adds: "Obviously since I'm taking the job, I believe it's not going to keep us from continuing to get better." Kurtz quotes several LAT staffers and observers, including me saying that Baquet's decision to stay was popular in the newsroom. Kit Rachlis, editor of Los Angeles magazine, called Carroll's departure "a real blow" and added: "The real question is what Tribune is going to do with the Times. Are they going to impose more cuts? Are they going to bundle bureaus together, especially in Washington? Close down foreign bureaus?" American Journalism Review also talked to Roberts, Marimow and other veteran journalism figures about Carroll and Baquet.
* Also: Baquet tells Gabriel Snyder of Variety, "The publisher (Jeffrey Johnson) has made it clear that we're going to have to tighten our belts in the coming months." 8:36 a.m.
Why do papers even bother having their own reporters overseas? They all write exactly the same cr*p, taken from AP and Reuters anyway.
As it moves further to the left the LA times continues to draw from a shrinking well. If it moves to the right it will only lose readership at a faster rate.
How about this:
1) Fire everybody making more that $9.00 per hour.
2) Replace them all with illegal immigrants at minimum wage.
3) Convert the LA Times to a Spanish language paper.
Where do I send my bill?
Time for the reporters and union workers to STRIKE against big corporate newspaper.
OH TOMKOW if you own stock in Chicago Tribune LA Times is killing you
The Spanish in LA can't read.
No problem. We'll just use lots of pictures.
Anyway, the way things are going, in the next few years there aren't going to be enough English readers to support the paper either.
Former NYT Managing Editor Eugene Roberts, who hired Carroll at the Philadelphia Inquirer, says what the Tribune Company is proposing amounts to a "national tragedy." He adds that Carroll did not want to "preside over a major diminishment or the destruction of the L.A. Times as we now know it." William Marimow, the managing editor of National Public Radio who succeeded Carroll at the Baltimore Sun, said the Tribune's budget plans "would require dismantling much of what he'd done."
Actually, Los Angeles is a very illiterate city....I didnt mean to make it sound that bad. I think 50% are functioning illiterate.
Only 11% of LAUSD students can perform university level work upon graudation of high school.
L.A.TIMES=no loss.
Even in one of the most liberal market, the LAT is still a shrinking fish wrapper.
Let them go down the tubes. Who will miss them?
The paper also took huge hits in circulation over the past two reporting periods. For the six months ending September 2004, daily circ slid 5.5% and Sunday dropped 6.3%. For the latest period, ending March 2005, daily copies decreased 6.4% and Sunday fell 7.9%. Total advertising revenue for the paper rose less than 1% in the second quarter of 2005.
Another hit came when General Motors announced in April that it was pulling advertising from the Times in response to a series of unfavorable articles, including one written by Pulitzer-prize winning car columnist Dan Neil on April 6. The paper would not disclose the amount of money lost, but some analysts estimated that GM, one of the paper's largest advertisers, spent close to $20 million in 2004.
What's that you say? Circulation is down? Pretty severely over the last couple of years? And they want to make cuts now?
I don't understand this. I'm so confused.
But it's also a shrinking market. The LA Times aims at the affluent white liberal, but they're a declining demographic, thanks to the invasion from the south.
How about this:
1) Fire everybody making more that $9.00 per hour.
2) Replace them all with illegal immigrants at minimum wage.
3) Convert the LA Times to a Spanish language paper.
Where do I send my bill?
heck i think you should stage a corporate take over
this is too hilarious
couldn't happen to a worse group
The same thing with the rest of the liberal rag papers, and the rest of the MSM ... let them go down the tubes, who cares and who will miss them.
if they replaced all the liberal writers with ones just out of college, they could do no worse!
I hope the Sun-Sentinel is the next rag to feel the Tribune Company's budget axe....they can start by firng Buddy Nevins, Mike Mayo and the whole homophile editorial board.
does this count on Sunday LA Times only good thing about that edition is sale adverstiging and coupons cut out of LOL!
I AM SERIOUS LOL!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.