Jump to content

the failing NYT.


Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, ICEMAN! said:

119 Pulitzer Prizes have been awarded to the Times.  They must be doing something right.

Some of us have been reading the NYT off and on for over 40 years, and some of us are a little more in tune with their history, besides their Pulitzers.  They're biased.  End of story.  Post up their day after the election mea culpa that was nothing more than empty words.  Post up the articles about all the layoffs, and renting space at their building to help raise revenues.  You know, unbiased stuff.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DriftBusta said:

another Canadian douchenozzle thats probably followed American politics for about 5 years and thinks he has it all figured out. New York Times is cited by liberals as the de facto news source.  The rest of the country has figured out their bias.  Maybe you will too someday.  

You were wrong, just admit it and move on.  

& You confuse ideology with bias and journalistic integrity.

27 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

Some of us have been reading the NYT off and on for over 40 years, and some of us are a little more in tune with their history, besides their Pulitzers.  They're biased.  End of story.  Post up their day after the election mea culpa that was nothing more than empty words.  Post up the articles about all the layoffs, and renting space at their building to help raise revenues.  You know, unbiased stuff.

Yawn.  If you were paying attention during those  40 years you wouldn't have suggested they are failing.  You know, not being ignorant and bias.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, Catman said:

You were wrong, just admit it and move on.  

& You confuse ideology with bias and journalistic integrity.

Yawn.  If you were paying attention during those  40 years you wouldn't have suggested they are failing.  You know, not being ignorant and bias.

This is NOT, the dealings of a newspaper in a highly successful business model:

 

More Wretched News for Newspapers as Advertising Woes Drive Anxiety

By SYDNEY EMBEROCT. 27, 2016

The gloom began earlier this month, when Gerard Baker, the editor in chief of The Wall Street Journal, sent a memo to employees that said, in part, “every story should be as short as it needs to be.” The next week, William Lewis, the chief executive of Dow Jones, which owns The Journal, announced a newsroom review that he said would be “underpinned by a series of cost-management initiatives.”

Two days later, on Oct. 21, the anvil fell: Mr. Baker informed employees in another memo that The Journal was looking for a “substantial” number of them to take buyouts, and that layoffs were in the offing.

With print advertising continuing to drop precipitously, you would be hard-pressed to find a newsroom devoid of uncertainty anywhere in the country. Companies like Gannett have recently announced layoffs, and its stock price has plunged during a monthslong pursuit of the company that owns The Los Angeles Times and The Chicago Tribune. The New York Times recently went through buyouts and has acknowledged that its newsroom will get even smaller next year. And for journalists at The Wall Street Journal, anxiety in the last several weeks has been especially pronounced.

Numerous Journal employees, who spoke on condition of anonymity because they feared endangering their jobs, said in interviews and conversations that they have received few specifics from management about the size and scope of the coming cuts. Mr. Baker said in one of his memos last week that changes to the print newspaper would “involve some consolidation of sections of the paper and the teams that produce it.” The employees said that the staff is now openly speculating about the potential for once-prized sections, including Greater New York and Personal Journal, to be folded or significantly reduced. Separately, employees have been working without a union contract since Oct. 1, and negotiations with the company are ongoing.

“There’s a lot of concern, a lot of worry,” said Timothy Martell, the executive director of the Independent Association of Publishers’ Employees, the union that represents about 1,300 workers at Dow Jones. “People are anxious, and they want to know how these changes will affect them and their families.”

Continue reading the main story
 

A spokeswoman for Dow Jones declined to comment for this article.

Across the country, those working in the newspaper industry are fretting as the end of the year approaches. Driving much of the anxiety is a steep drop in print ad revenue, once the lifeblood for newspapers. Spending on newspaper advertising in the United States is projected to fall 11 percent this year, to about $12.5 billion, according to the Interpublic Group’s Magna.

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The New York Times Company on Wednesday reported a steep decline in print advertising revenue for the third quarter, adding to the newspaper industry’s woes.

For the quarter, print advertising revenue fell 19 percent, driving an 8 percent decline in total advertising revenue. The drop followed a 14 percent decline in print advertising revenue in the second quarter.

Digital advertising revenue, however, which now represents 36 percent of the company’s advertising revenue, increased 21 percent in the quarter, to $44 million, a welcome relief for the company after a decline in digital advertising last quarter. The Times also added 116,000 net digital-only subscriptions for news products during the quarter, bringing its total to 1.3 million. Including crossword product subscriptions, it has about 1.6 million digital-only subscribers.

This is an anxious and challenging time for the newspaper industry. The Times results were announced the same day that The Wall Street Journal informed its staff of sweeping changes to its print paper, including a cutback to its Greater New York section. On Tuesday the Gannett Company, the publisher of USA Today and more than 100 other papers, walked away from its deal to acquire Tronc, formerly Tribune Publishing, in part because of the financial obstacles involved.

Print advertising revenue, which once sustained newspaper companies, has been falling for years. But the pace of the decline has accelerated, and digital advertising and other forms of revenue have not yet bridged the gap.

In an earnings call on Wednesday, Mark Thompson, chief executive of the Times Company, said it had been “a much tougher quarter for print advertising” for the company, but he focused largely on The Times’s digital success.

At The Times, adjusted operating profit, the company’s preferred method for assessing performance, fell to $39 million, from $48 million in the same quarter a year earlier.

The Times took a $2.9 million charge related to the closing of its Paris editing and prepress operations.

Circulation revenue increased 3 percent, to $217 million, as digital-only subscription revenue rose 16 percent, to $59 million. Total revenue for the quarter fell 1 percent, to $364 million from $367 million in the same period last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

22 minutes ago, Catman said:

You were wrong, just admit it and move on.  

& You confuse ideology with bias and journalistic integrity.

Yawn.  If you were paying attention during those  40 years you wouldn't have suggested they are failing.  You know, not being ignorant and bias.

 You have been a long term holder of this POS right?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, DriftBusta said:

Some of us have been reading the NYT off and on for over 40 years, and some of us are a little more in tune with their history, besides their Pulitzers.  They're biased.  End of story.  Post up their day after the election mea culpa that was nothing more than empty words.  Post up the articles about all the layoffs, and renting space at their building to help raise revenues.  You know, unbiased stuff.

The New York Times!!!!  Failing for 165 years and counting!!!!

:lmao:

 

How many Pulitzers has your favourite "conservative" newspaper won?  Pick one, anyone, I don't care.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
16 hours ago, Rw06GT said:

:lmao:

 

New York Times subscription growth soars tenfold, adding 132,000, after Trump's win

 

A whole 132,000. :lmao: In a city of how many million. :lmao:

NYT's is not just a city paper.   I can get it in Iowa if I want.  132,000 in a country of 320 million. :lol:  

The dissenting media always thrives when the opposing party is in power.   Rush became Rush during the Clinton years.   Other talk radio in the Obama years.  40% or more of the country will always disapprove of what is being done no matter who is in charge.   That's a pretty big market.  

Edited by Highmark
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DriftBusta said:

Some of us have been reading the NYT off and on for over 40 years, and some of us are a little more in tune with their history, besides their Pulitzers.  They're biased.  End of story.  Post up their day after the election mea culpa that was nothing more than empty words.  Post up the articles about all the layoffs, and renting space at their building to help raise revenues.  You know, unbiased stuff.

they're simply biased is a direction that you don't like. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Platinum Contributing Member
4 hours ago, Cold War said:

  Now....................Photo shop a dick in her mouth and you got a real scoop!

They tried to say how disrespectful she was putting her feet on the furniture of the oval office. :lol:  Of course Bill got head in there from a intern but that's ok.  

download (60).jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

8 hours ago, ArcticCrusher said:

 

 You have been a long term holder of this POS right?

Do you speak English, or is that Nook Gibberish?

5 hours ago, spin_dry said:

they're simply biased is a direction that you don't like. 

Sure, they capture the coastal limousine liberal/public sector talking point crowd pretty well.  Red state America, not so much.  

Link to comment
Share on other sites

24 minutes ago, DriftBusta said:

Do you speak English, or is that Nook Gibberish?

Sure, they capture the coastal limousine liberal/public sector talking point crowd pretty well.  Red state America, not so much.  

It's been a great 40 year hold for him.

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
  • Trying to pay the bills, lol

×
×
  • Create New...