Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Readers Angry at The Times for Schwarzenegger Stories
Los Angeles Times ^ | October 5, 2003 | Steve Hymon, Cara Mia DiMassa and Mitchell Landsberg, Times Staff Writers

Posted on 10/05/2003 10:54:03 AM PDT by Nachum

Kathy McIver is a Democrat from La Habra and a longtime subscriber to The Times. Today's paper, she says, will be the last that will be delivered to her door.

Like many readers, McIver is angry. She is angry about The Times' coverage of the California recall campaign, and especially angry about the stories that the newspaper has run in recent days detailing allegations that Arnold Schwarzenegger touched women inappropriately.

(Excerpt) Read more at latimes.com ...


TOPICS: Business/Economy; Constitution/Conservatism; Crime/Corruption; Culture/Society; Foreign Affairs; Front Page News; News/Current Events; US: California
KEYWORDS: angry; backfire; calgov2002; latimes; latimeschadenfreude; losangelestimes; mediabias; readers; recall; schadenfreude; schwarzenegger; smearcampaign; stories; thetimes
Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last
To: Nachum
"Over a thousand readers have recently terminated their subscriptions."

They're merely piling on to an onging trend.

LAT's circulation at 9/30/1999 (average for previous 6 months) was 1,078,160, per http://www.naa.org/info/facts00/14.html

LAT's circulation at 9/30/2000 (average for previous 6 months) was 1,033,399, per http://www.naa.org/info/facts01/18_top20circ/index.html

LAT's circulation at 9/30/2001 (average for previous 6 months, I believe, but not sure) was 972,659, per http://www.freep.com/jobspage/links/top100.htm

Figures weren't findable for September of 2002 for anyone at the web sites listed. My theory is that the newspaper business doesn't want to tell us how much they're slipping.

So we know that LAT lost over 9% of its readers during a period when overall population was growing. I daresay it has lost just as many additional subscribers during the past two years.

BUT THE LEFTISTS WHO RUN THE NEWSROOM WON'T CARE UNTIL THEY'RE SHOWN THE DOOR. Where are the adults at the Tribune Company in all of this? (BTW, sent an e-mail to Tribune Company yesterday at tribune.com)

61 posted on 10/05/2003 2:51:10 PM PDT by litany_of_lies
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: notorious vrc
However, the resemblance is eerily striking.

Especially around the mouth. It caused a fit of the giggles unlike any I've had since I was a shirt-tail kid.

62 posted on 10/05/2003 3:14:39 PM PDT by strela (Will Tom McClintock have to "make a re$ervation" to pay back all that Indian money?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 58 | View Replies]

To: Vets_Husband_and_Wife
Years ago the L.A. Times got caught with its pants down when one of its reporters was discovered to have been calling a prosecutor to press charges against a California legislator. I forgot the name of the legislator but I think his first name was Alan. Does anybody else recall this incident? It proved to be a terrible embarrassment for the L.A. Times since they had a long vendetta against this legislator.
63 posted on 10/05/2003 3:21:29 PM PDT by PJ-Comix (A Stitch In Time Won't Save You A Dime But At Least It Makes This Dopey Saying Rhyme.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 13 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
Good email, John!
64 posted on 10/05/2003 3:23:05 PM PDT by Howlin
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 8 | View Replies]

To: Howlin
Good email, John!

Thanks. I figure if enough people like us make their inboxes look like the 8th circle of hell, it might at least give them pause the next time. I only wish I subscribed to the Times so that I could cancel it.

65 posted on 10/05/2003 3:25:27 PM PDT by John Jorsett
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 64 | View Replies]

To: John Jorsett
If a bodybuilder in the 1970s had told me my "butt" looked good, I would have been ecstatic!
66 posted on 10/05/2003 3:30:44 PM PDT by Ceoman
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 65 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
My newspaper had an LA Times article in it describing the candidates - they kind of missed describing Arnold's string of businesses, real estate holdings and his success in areas outside bodybuilding and film.
67 posted on 10/05/2003 3:35:19 PM PDT by Chancellor Palpatine
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
But not my sister. If she doesn't get her LA Times fix every day, she panics. There is nothing I can do to change her mind.
68 posted on 10/05/2003 3:57:26 PM PDT by Paulus Invictus (RATs are scum!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Dante3
CNN has continued to report the Hitler allegation.

The grinning ninny Margaret Carlson repeated it on the Capital Gang last night
and nobody refuted her, not even Bob Novak.

69 posted on 10/05/2003 4:22:44 PM PDT by Allan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 33 | View Replies]

To: PJ-Comix
Sorry.. I sure don't. I don't read the LA Times, and I won't even subscribe online to the Enquirer.. OPPS the LA TIMES!!
70 posted on 10/05/2003 6:16:54 PM PDT by Vets_Husband_and_Wife (CNN: Where " WE report what WE decide!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 63 | View Replies]

To: ChadGore
That's her, the ONE and ONLY Susan Estrich!!

What has amazed us.. is how she has been so against the LA Times in this, and spoken out so publicly and so soon!!

Blew us away!! I thought she was going to say she was casting her vote for Arnold because of it all. Just an amazing turn of event for Susan to blast Democratic politics the way she has over this!
71 posted on 10/05/2003 6:21:48 PM PDT by Vets_Husband_and_Wife (CNN: Where " WE report what WE decide!!")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 17 | View Replies]

To: hobson
Me too.

I refuse to register at their site.

72 posted on 10/05/2003 6:50:55 PM PDT by GOPJ
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 4 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
My print-media sources breathlessly tell me the numbers that have cancelled the Times since the recall started top 50,000! Sure hope Davis is worth it to the publisher. He's cost them a bundle and he hasn't even applied the newsprint tax yet! (er...never mind. I was having a Pete Wilson flashback!)
73 posted on 10/05/2003 6:58:37 PM PDT by cartoonistx
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 18 | View Replies]

To: cartoonistx
My print-media sources breathlessly tell me the numbers that have cancelled the Times since the recall started top 50,000!

Boy, I hope that's true. That would be a full 5% of their daily circulation!

74 posted on 10/05/2003 7:36:37 PM PDT by Timesink (For a good time, visit clark2004.meetup.com. Ask for Mary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 73 | View Replies]

To: Chancellor Palpatine
My newspaper had an LA Times article in it describing the candidates - they kind of missed describing Arnold's string of businesses, real estate holdings and his success in areas outside bodybuilding and film.

An unintentional oversight, I'm sure. </sarcasm>

75 posted on 10/05/2003 7:38:42 PM PDT by Timesink (For a good time, visit clark2004.meetup.com. Ask for Mary!)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 67 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Wow! I can't believe they printed this! Great news!! I added my own complaint to the thousands of others!
76 posted on 10/05/2003 7:45:25 PM PDT by ladyinred (The left have blood on their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Nachum
Join Us…Your One Thread To All The California Recall News Threads!

Want on our daily or major news ping lists? Freepmail DoctorZin

77 posted on 10/05/2003 7:45:34 PM PDT by DoctorZIn
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
I had been a 33 years subscriber to the LA Times, no more. I'll miss the crossword puzzle. I don't have any idea how many other subscribers cancelled, but I had to wait "on hold" for nearly 25 minutes on Friday morning to cancel
78 posted on 10/05/2003 7:47:29 PM PDT by hanta-yo
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 75 | View Replies]

To: Timesink
Am I crazy? I am a female, I have been "groped" before, we used to just slap the guy and go on with our lives! Now it is called, "mistreatment" and is a crime or something? Have we all lost our minds? This isn't the same as luring some woman to your hotel room and unzipping and well, you know the rest! It a pat on the fanny, or grabbing a boob, right? You SLAP the jerk if you don't like it!!!
79 posted on 10/05/2003 7:56:05 PM PDT by ladyinred (The left have blood on their hands.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 22 | View Replies]

To: freedumb2003
Your letter is better! I guess you didn't have a screaming baby on your lap! LOL. Excellent.

I too am keeping it as one of the two papers we receive for the same reasons as you: to know what Pravda is spinning and Ramirez. Also, my son reads the sports page and I like the Food section.

80 posted on 10/05/2003 9:13:08 PM PDT by Yaelle
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 35 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-8081-86 next last

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.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
News/Activism
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson