NY Times SE "Bumped" Upstairs

Well, not "Paterno long"

 

I'll ask an anonymous1 question: Anyone know when they're looking to make a hire?

 

Anybody who had Pete Thamel under his employ, IMO, is a pretty damn good judge of talent. Not saying, just saying.

And I agree, largely, with accguy. I read the NYT for the stuff I *know* I won't get in my suburban rag or on the WWL's cornucopia of "platforms".

rb

 

That's not long. 8-10 years is the life span for the gig nowadays. There are many around here who can remember the days when a guy got in as SE and stayed for much longer.

 

The New York Times. The NEW YORK Times. I am in the metro NY area. Choosing to spend so much $$$ and emphasis on non-local stories is a tacit admission they can't compete in the local market and have thrown in the towel having been butt-dragged by the competition.

 

There is no "competition." The tabs, which I also buy, are a different product. The Times is foremost a national, in many respects global, newspaper. It does and should set a higher bar in terms of day-to-day news judgment. I'm glad never to have seen a Kardashian on its pages (not that one or two haven't slipped by me).

 

The Times doesn't need New York to survive. The same can't be said for the Post or the Daily News.

 

Goalmouth, I don't know where you are in the New York Metro, but I'll bet you don't commute by train.

It might be tough to read the Times on the 4 train, but folks who ride the LIRR, Metro-North, NJ Transit, even the Staten Island Ferry routinely read multiple papers.

The Post & the News cover sports differently that the Times, and that's ok.

The Times sports section used to do a better job of competing on the day to day stories. And their old "Sports Monday" section was a must read.

But, even before the advent of the internet, the Times was routinely missing the late games. Maybe if you could find a late edition, you'd get the gamers, the west coast box scores, and the updated standings. But, too often you'd get an early addition that had nothing.

What's a sports editor to do in that case?

Now, you can get the latest news on their website, but you get award winning stories in the pages of the paper.

No section produces more original content. No section routinely sends reporters to events around the country or around the world.

I haven't lived in NYC for 10 years, but I still read both the Times & Post sports section every day -- just like I always have.

 

Or Karen Crouse. They should have never taken her off the Jet beat.

 

Goalmouth, I just think their priorities are different from those of the other papers in the market. There are many kinds of consumer and way more than one kind of sports page reader.

In the NYC metro, there are certainly people who read only one paper. Some love the Daily News or the Post because of sports coverage and the crazy stuff they cover. But somebody who lives in Jersey might choose the Record or the Ledger (depending on where in Jersey they are) because they want more local news to go along with still pretty good sports coverage. Same can be said with Long Island and Newsday.

Others want to read just one pretty complete newspaper that has strong national and business news.

I know when I read the NYT, I get interesting stories. I don't care as much about Rex Ryan and foot fetishes as other people, I'd rather have something I can't get anywhere else.

 

I want to work at the New York Times when I graduate from the Columbia Graduate School of Journalism. I want to live in a big apartment in Greenwich Village and go to cool restaurants with my friends.

(Elite outlook on the world that doesn't serve NY sports fans well.)

 

I apparently suck, because never in my career have I particularly wanted to live and work in New York. And that's no offense to New York, either. Just not my thing.