LA Times goes to the dogs
As I reported here, the Los Angeles Times recently canceled its book section and its opinion section (which had been cohabiting like bad roommates recently anyway), the real estate section, the automotive section, and the magazine. While I was at the San Diego Comic-Con, the final Sunday Times with these sections appeared, wrapped with an editorial message that no one I know buys. To paraphrase: “while we’re downsizing, we’re still going to be better than ever.” While acknowledging that it would be difficult for them to say anything else — other than the noble thing, like “This is a retreat and we’re saddened and ashamed” — this sentiment is so unbelievable it leaves my trust in the media even further diminished.
Tomorrow the first Sunday Times without all those sections will arrive on my doorstep. I’m not sure what I’m going to read in it. I suppose I’ll flip to the back of the front section to see what remains of Opinion, and I’ll take a look at the Calendar section now retitled “Arts & Books” to see how much book has squeezed out art, or vice versa. Or maybe I’ll subscribe to the Sunday New York Times, which has wisely done a major media buy in the area, aimed at people like me and like all the locals who’ve recently told me that if the LA Times doesn’t have a book section, it also won’t have them for long.
While we heretofore loyal readers scratch our heads and figure out how little newspaper still qualifies one as a major newspaper, we can take comfort in something new that the Los Angeles Times has added. That’s right — even in an age of cutbacks, they’re looking to expand coverage into vital new areas.
Click here for their new and much ballyhooed database of dog names in Los Angeles County.
It turns out that “Princess” is the most-registered dog name in Los Angeles County. And it turns out that there are 24 (!) other dogs in the County sharing the name of my dog, Gem. I found this unsettling, knowing as I do that she is definitely one-of-a-kind, but was relieved to see that she’s the only Australian Shepherd in LA with that name. So I am vastly relieved.
I know that the LA Times’ new dog-name database will have snobs in other cities with other metropolitan daily newspapers howling in derision — people in cities like New York and Washington, DC — but I think they’re barking up the wrong tree. There are only so many dollars and man hours to go around at the LA Times. If I want to learn about books, I can walk into any mall and see what’s in that little window of the Borders Express, and if I want to know opinions about important issues, I can just listen to what the government tells me. But how else would I find out how popular my dog’s name is?
August 3rd, 2008 at 5:11 am
As a New Yorker who loves his daily NY Times fix, this is a paper that should be wary of casting too many stones. True, the Books section is (so far) undiminished, but the Arts coverage is far from untouched: Dance lost both Jennifer Dunning and Deborah Jowitt (two critics who actually attended and wrote about younger–well, younger than Merce Cunningham–dance), and Theater lost Lawrence Van Gelder (who regularly attended and wrote about Off-Off Broadway). Many of their arts writers who’ve stayed are “freelance”–hired guns who will, most likely, write what they’re asked to write about more frequently than they will pitch their own stories/reviews. One has to wonder if the next “Urinetown” or “[title of show]” were to emerge in the coming years whether the NY Times would find out without reading about it on a blog… assuming someone there actually reads blogs.