Radio talker Hugh Hewitt (hughhewitt.com) has had a long running assertion, rightfully so, that the Los Angeles Times, aka the Left Angeles Times or Pravda West for those of you old enough to remember the old Soviet Union daily newspaper, is irrelevant to the modern media.
He is right but utterly wasting his time fighting the gray monster of Spring Street.
If I really need to see something in the Times, I can easily go to their website. I only actually buy the Red Rag only when there is a major current event and save it for posterity.
But honestly, with so many other sources on the web and cable news, the Times and their propaganda is just not even important to read on any ongoing basis.
So while Hugh has on the columnist Joel Stein to defend a sophomoric, or moronic, column about the war in Iraq and the fact Mr. Stein does not like supporting the troops because he opposes the war, it is ridiculous.
The circulation of the once great newspaper is way below one million, which is a benchmark of a successful major metropolitan newspaper in a city the size of Los Angeles.
According to the 2005 New York Times almanac, as of 2004, Times circulation is at 983,727.
The Times is read by its followers and no one else.
Giving them the public platform that Hugh Hewitt gives them is a waste of time.
The Times is not going to change until it changes the whole culture of the newsroom, editors and management.
Firing the repulsive and reflexive lefty columnist Robert Scheer is not going to bring back center right readers.
actually reporting the news with as little bias as possible will do that.
So, as I say, does anyone read the Los Angeles Times?
No comments:
Post a Comment