LAT kills off the local section. Yes, you read that right.

[TigerVols]

...but you didn't read it in the actual paper, nor did you read that they jacked the cover price up as well.

Wow.

http://www.laobserved.com/archive/2009/01/los_angeles_times_kills.php

[PeteyPirate]

Hypernational.

[Johnny Dangerously]

For the journalists, this is another big hit. They already work under the constant threat of layoffs — department heads have reportedly readied their lists, awaiting the final count from Hartenstein — and there's not much confidence that things will ever get better. Morale totally blows, especially in Metro, the department most hurt by losing the section. Hartenstein also has people kind of freaked out, I hear — but only unofficially since he has tried to ban employees from talking to me. "We have a vindictive publisher," an editor told me, asking to stay unnamed. An afternoon email to Editor Russ Stanton seeking context to the California section axing went unanswered.

Funny how publishers and editors just love and encourage whistle-blowers and employees willing to go on the record about workplace issues -- until it's their employees and their workplace.

[SF_Express]

This day is a fucked-up-business milestone.

Between South Bend and Belo and this, it's simply unbelievable.

No local section -- in the Los Angeles Times.

And this publisher clown, who came in with all those positive words. What a crock of shit he has turned out to be. At least he's maintaining recent tradition.

I am completely embarrassed that I ever said a single word that perhaps the likes of an outsider like Sam Zell taking over a media company might be a good thing.

[WriteThinking]

Hypernational.

This will not be hyper-national. The national and foreign sections will be watered down and downplayed, too, in the effort to "enhance" the local section. I think that means that whatever California stuff The Times does have will be positioned in front of the national/foreign news within the same A-1 section.

This day is a fucked-up-business milestone.

Between South Bend and Belo and this, it's simply unbelievable.

No local section -- in the Los Angeles Times.

And this publisher clown, who came in with all those positive words. What a crock of shit he has turned out to be. At least he's maintaining recent tradition.

I am completely embarrassed that I ever said a single word that perhaps the likes of an outsider like Sam Zell taking over a media company might be a good thing.

I'm right there with you, SF Express.

These idiots from the radio/TV/music/"multimedia" businesses are going to be the death of the LA Times.

Newspapers need to train their real journalists to fill whatever multimedia needs they have.

And these jerks who they/we stupidly thought might ever be able to help? They need to be escorted the heck out of the building, just like all the other employees who have been let go in recent years.

I feel sick. I really do.

[Baron Scicluna]

For the journalists, this is another big hit. They already work under the constant threat of layoffs — department heads have reportedly readied their lists, awaiting the final count from Hartenstein — and there's not much confidence that things will ever get better. Morale totally blows, especially in Metro, the department most hurt by losing the section. Hartenstein also has people kind of freaked out, I hear — but only unofficially since he has tried to ban employees from talking to me. "We have a vindictive publisher," an editor told me, asking to stay unnamed. An afternoon email to Editor Russ Stanton seeking context to the California section axing went unanswered.

Funny how publishers and editors just love and encourage whistle-blowers and employees willing to go on the record about workplace issues -- until it's their employees and their workplace.

I find it funny (well, not really) that with all the problems that newspapers are having, that publishers still threaten employees with punishment if they talk to an outside news source. That's like Captain Smith getting upset with a passenger because they spilled a drink on the Titanic.

[Bubbler]

All I know is that my daily visit to the Journalism Only thread has turned into my daily dose of depression. Fuck.

[WriteThinking]

Apparently, the backlash has already begun. Check out the comments section under this blog item discussing the change of location for local news.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/01/hollywood-paper.html

[slappy4428]

Apparently, the backlash has already begun. Check out the comments section under this blog item discussing the change of location for local news.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/01/hollywood-paper.html

They's pissed

[SoCalDude]

   OK, how long before we get: "Our readers spoke ... and WE listened. The California section will re-debut on Monday."

[SF_Express]

Apparently, the backlash has already begun. Check out the comments section under this blog item discussing the change of location for local news.

http://latimesblogs.latimes.com/lanow/2009/01/hollywood-paper.html

I can't help but wonder if Shelby Grad isn't going to buy some trouble with this blog post, but geezus, if they react badly, they might not have a staff left by next Friday.

[slappy4428]

Still a shitty chickenshit publisher who spiked the story on the rate increase

[Piotr Rasputin]

These idiots from the radio/TV/music/"multimedia" businesses are going to be the death of the LA Times.

Newspapers need to train their real journalists to fill whatever multimedia needs they have.

And these jerks who they/we stupidly thought might ever be able to help? They need to be escorted the heck out of the building, just like all the other employees who have been let go in recent years.

I feel sick. I really do.

I don't understand what people from "radio/TV/"multimedia" could have done to save a paper that, like most papers, is seeing its ad revenue plummet.

It's so easy just to blame "Those bastards in non-print media!!!" I know thye semntiment is often that they're just not "real journalists," but that's complete bullcrap. Of course, that's another thread, and I don't get why you brought it up here.

This is more a situation of a new owner getting in over his head from the start. And an owner who doesn't care about the great city of Los Angeles, or its newspaper, as anything but an asset to be squeezed.

[Brooklyn Bridge]

These idiots from the radio/TV/music/"multimedia" businesses are going to be the death of the LA Times.

Newspapers need to train their real journalists to fill whatever multimedia needs they have.

And these jerks who they/we stupidly thought might ever be able to help? They need to be escorted the heck out of the building, just like all the other employees who have been let go in recent years.

I feel sick. I really do.

I don't understand what people from "radio/TV/"multimedia" could have done to save a paper that, like most papers, is seeing its ad revenue plummet.

It's so easy just to blame "Those bastards in non-print media!!!" I know thye semntiment is often that they're just not "real journalists," but that's complete bullcrap. Of course, that's another thread, and I don't get why you brought it up here.

This is more a situation of a new owner getting in over his head from the start. And an owner who doesn't care about the great city of Los Angeles, or its newspaper, as anything but an asset to be squeezed.

Trust, the people in the "non-print" media are going through the same thing.  Its been bad ever since the Telecom Act of 96 that allows big companies to buy all types of radio stations, but now that bill is coming due and its the worker bees getting the ax.   See Clear Channel, CBS Radio layoffs in past two weeks.  Many good, longtime broadcasters out of work.  Its sad.    

And one could argue that the local section (at least in The Hartford Courant) died the day Tribune took over.   They eviscerated (sp?) the staff and what is left behind is a shell of what it once was.  That goes for sports, news, local, everything.

[WriteThinking]

These idiots from the radio/TV/music/"multimedia" businesses are going to be the death of the LA Times.

Newspapers need to train their real journalists to fill whatever multimedia needs they have.

And these jerks who they/we stupidly thought might ever be able to help? They need to be escorted the heck out of the building, just like all the other employees who have been let go in recent years.

I feel sick. I really do.

I don't understand what people from "radio/TV/"multimedia" could have done to save a paper that, like most papers, is seeing its ad revenue plummet.

It's so easy just to blame "Those bastards in non-print media!!!" I know thye semntiment is often that they're just not "real journalists," but that's complete bullcrap. Of course, that's another thread, and I don't get why you brought it up here.

This is more a situation of a new owner getting in over his head from the start. And an owner who doesn't care about the great city of Los Angeles, or its newspaper, as anything but an asset to be squeezed.

It's not that these other-business people -- who now, somehow, prevail over most of the top ranks of the LAT -- have done anything in particular, in and of themselves, to kill the paper.

But that's just the point. They supposedly were brought in because of their business acumen and experience in alternative media to help revitalize the Times. They haven't done that.

And, that being the case, I don't think they belong there. I see them as interlopers, probably costing the paper a fortune to keep, contributing nothing, and, worse, seemingly not caring about the paper/company, or its core audience, and being "vindictive" to their employees/colleagues, probably just because they can.

That being the case, I would prefer that journalists who were/are already within the company be the ones to try to right the ship and to stay in their jobs, in order to learn new jobs, if need be, rather than being the ones constantly being put out of work.

I really believe that traditional journalists who care about their medium, especially ones who are or will be trained in whatever is going on now, or next, are the ones who should be used to steer newspaper companies through this transition period.

In this instance, for example, I believe the publisher would have been better advised (oh, wait, he was, by all the senior editors) to enfold Business, rather than California/Metro, into another section (probably Sports).

[Piotr Rasputin]

I'm more a fan of the traditional reporters finding escape hatches and letting the business geniuses remain to sink with the Titanic.

[JBHawkEye]

All I know is that my daily visit to the Journalism Only thread has turned into my daily dose of depression. Fuck.

I've been thinking that as well.

[WriteThinking]

I'm more a fan of the traditional reporters finding escape hatches and letting the business geniuses remain to sink with the Titanic.

Well, I guess you might be right in that. Sadly.

Here's the second half of a double-whammy out of the LAT today, also via LAObserved.

http://www.laobserved.com/

[MileHigh]

This is beyond sad. I grew up with the Times. Ate it up. Got into the business wanting to work there. It's so sad to see this.

[Birdscribe]

This is beyond sad. I grew up with the Times. Ate it up. Got into the business wanting to work there. It's so sad to see this.

Join the crowd, Mile.

I was fortunate enough to see my byline in the main section a few times when I worked for one of the community papers. One of the biggest rushes I ever had.

I heard this was coming, but another 300 positions? Christ privy, that's insane.

[Big Buckin' agate_monkey]

In the meantime, they should create latimeslocal.com as a way to draw readers away from latimes.com ... that way people know where to go for local info and they can bypass the original site that took readers away from the print product.

[MidwestSportsGuy]

A bit off topic, perhaps, but the folks leaving comments to that post appear to be ... intelligent. I mean, they can spell, and they provide some serious insight. At my old shop, roughly 88 percent of all the article comments were impossible to read: every other word spelled wrong, unsubstantiated claims and just plan mularkey ("thiss wrter prolly didnt evene past gramer school LOL"). 

Back on topic: still a shitty day.

[TigerVols]

I'm more a fan of the traditional reporters finding escape hatches and letting the business geniuses remain to sink with the Titanic.

Well, I guess you might be right in that. Sadly.

Here's the second half of a double-whammy out of the LAT today, also via LAObserved.

http://www.laobserved.com/

So the publisher says the A and California sections are the "most read" in the paper, and so why not combine them into one? And thus get rid of one full-page, back page ad slot?

Brilliant!

And putting the classifieds into the sports section, when it's already just 6 pages some days is any dumber.

[rpmmutant]

This is beyond sad. I grew up with the Times. Ate it up. Got into the business wanting to work there. It's so sad to see this.

Join the crowd, Mile.

I was fortunate enough to see my byline in the main section a few times when I worked for one of the community papers. One of the biggest rushes I ever had.

I heard this was coming, but another 300 positions? Christ privy, that's insane.

I remember how much I loved being a prep football stringer for the Times. Going to exotic places like Ridgecrest to cover football next to a boron mine.
I don't know what else to say.

[for_the_hunt]

Anyone have an e-mail address or phone number for Mr. Hartenstein?