1. Welcome to SportsJournalists.com, a friendly forum for discussing all things sports and journalism.

    Your voice is missing! You will need to register for a free account to get access to the following site features:
    • Reply to discussions and create your own threads.
    • Access to private conversations with other members.
    • Fewer ads.

    We hope to see you as a part of our community soon!

New York Times newsroom cuts

Discussion in 'Journalism topics only' started by Illino, Oct 13, 2011.

  1. Illino

    Illino Member

  2. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    I wonder if the NYT could ever get away with just eliminating all of its NY sports beats. Just going WSJ with sports - issue and trend stories, a business story here and there, a good feature, and that's that. Seems like the most efficient use of resources the NYT could perform - and this is probably the case with many, many major metro papers, is to slash sports travel to the bone. I can't see that the Times would suffer much in circulation and advertising for the money they would save.
  3. HanSenSE

    HanSenSE Well-Known Member

    The Times could. I doubt any other paper could.
  4. Drip

    Drip Active Member

    Sadly, others will follow suit.
    I'm tired of bending and seeing others bend over to take it without any lubricant.
  5. jackfinarelli

    jackfinarelli Well-Known Member

    The Washington Times tried that with "less than satisfactory" results...
  6. Fran Curci

    Fran Curci Well-Known Member

    You could cover every major sports beat for around $250,000. That's not including golf, auto racing, tennis, etc. Still, not a ton of money. And if you don't travel, you give up any authority in your coverage. I would rather lose a couple of sports feature writers, if nec. Your beats are still going to drive your enterprise coverage. Example: Boston Globe story yesterday on the beer-drinking, chicken-eating Red Sox.
  7. Frank_Ridgeway

    Frank_Ridgeway Well-Known Member

    There is plenty of market for the NYT's local beat coverage. Don't take this as a knock on the job the tabloids do, because that's not what I'm saying, but there are genuine sports fans who simply don't like that approach. It is possible to care about the Yankees -- and care about them more than just casually -- and tune out anything more than one or two stories a day as being excessive chatter and never listen to sports talk radio and never follow a sports writer on Twitter. The Times offers more than enough sports coverage if you are a normal adult, and you can't dump this coverage without seriously pissing off a few hundred thousand readers in one fell swoop.
  8. imjustagirl

    imjustagirl Active Member

    That seems OBSCENELY low.
  9. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    This is what I was wondering. I don't live in New York, so I skip over the New York City news and sports coverage in my paper every day. It almost seems out of place in what, to me, is, much like the Wall Street Journal, a national newspaper that just so happens to be headquartered in New York. I was curious about whether New Yorkers think about the Times as a local paper, or whether they think about it like I do, and think of the Post and Newsday as their local papers.
  10. Azrael

    Azrael Well-Known Member

  11. Moderator1

    Moderator1 Moderator Staff Member

    It's about right - maybe even a bit high. I think back to that great memo from the LA Times that was posted here a while back. If you travel smart, the money can go a long way. And that doesn't mean eating McDonald's every meal and staying at a Super 8. I want my crew to have their own rooms on the road - everyone needs some down time and privacy. But three people out and three rental cars? That makes no sense.
  12. Dick Whitman

    Dick Whitman Well-Known Member

    That's actually pretty cool of you. We always had to share at my shop.
Draft saved Draft deleted

Share This Page