Honey, They Shrunk The Times!
Clark Hoyt reports in his Sunday column the uproar over The New York Times changing the width of its paper by one and half inches last August is really much ado about nothing.
The Times Public Editor informs us the reduction of space was hatched to save the paper $10 million in newsprint every year; but only ended up slicing 10 percent of the news
To my naked eye, I’ve noticed a bigger difference.
Maybe it’s because while the Times news hole may look the same, with its blockbuster enterprise pieces; presidential campaign analysis, and Frank Rich’s signature tomes that are as long as the Magna Carta, the range of stories in reporting the dustups in every far corner of the globe doesn’t appear as extensive.
But why should I complain. Sooner or later, you come to expect less and less in life.
We don’t get as much roast beef with our Arby’s sandwiches anymore; peanut bags at the stadium are getting smaller, most of us are paying more and getting less from our health care providers--so it stands to reason, I suppose, that The New York Times would eventually follow the pack and short change its loyal readers..
The fury over the loss of space has been lessened by other daily newspapers, from coast-to-coast, turning into mom-and-pop-shops (reduced staffs, stripped-downed sections, more emphasis on local news) as the migration to the internet gathers speed. The Times, by comparison, looks downright encyclopedic.
While The Times continues it rich tradition of holding fast to excellence in journalism and delivering insightful coverage to the hot topics of the day, such as the war in Iraq, the presidential campaign, the housing crisis, I’m less fulfilled when I’m done plowing through the print edition.
Increasingly, I find myself having to visit other news sources and specialized blogs to find more in-depth coverage for world affairs and entertainment news
I realize these are challenging times for the publishing industry; and it would be unrealistic to expect increased news space while advertising revenue continues to tumble.
So while I’ve come to live with the reduced space; and still enjoy reading The Times, I feel strongly that the slogan ``All The News That’s Fit To Print’’ a catchphrase that has been parked on page one since October 25, 1896, should be removed, because during these changing times, the slogan no longer holds true and could be interpreted as false advertising.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
The Times Public Editor informs us the reduction of space was hatched to save the paper $10 million in newsprint every year; but only ended up slicing 10 percent of the news
To my naked eye, I’ve noticed a bigger difference.
Maybe it’s because while the Times news hole may look the same, with its blockbuster enterprise pieces; presidential campaign analysis, and Frank Rich’s signature tomes that are as long as the Magna Carta, the range of stories in reporting the dustups in every far corner of the globe doesn’t appear as extensive.
But why should I complain. Sooner or later, you come to expect less and less in life.
We don’t get as much roast beef with our Arby’s sandwiches anymore; peanut bags at the stadium are getting smaller, most of us are paying more and getting less from our health care providers--so it stands to reason, I suppose, that The New York Times would eventually follow the pack and short change its loyal readers..
The fury over the loss of space has been lessened by other daily newspapers, from coast-to-coast, turning into mom-and-pop-shops (reduced staffs, stripped-downed sections, more emphasis on local news) as the migration to the internet gathers speed. The Times, by comparison, looks downright encyclopedic.
While The Times continues it rich tradition of holding fast to excellence in journalism and delivering insightful coverage to the hot topics of the day, such as the war in Iraq, the presidential campaign, the housing crisis, I’m less fulfilled when I’m done plowing through the print edition.
Increasingly, I find myself having to visit other news sources and specialized blogs to find more in-depth coverage for world affairs and entertainment news
I realize these are challenging times for the publishing industry; and it would be unrealistic to expect increased news space while advertising revenue continues to tumble.
So while I’ve come to live with the reduced space; and still enjoy reading The Times, I feel strongly that the slogan ``All The News That’s Fit To Print’’ a catchphrase that has been parked on page one since October 25, 1896, should be removed, because during these changing times, the slogan no longer holds true and could be interpreted as false advertising.
-Bill Lucey
billlucey@bellsouth.net
Comments