NYT to cut paper size and close plant

[Weagle98 119]

The New York Times Co. (NYT.N: Quote, Profile, Research) plans to narrow the size of its flagship newspaper and close a printing plant, resulting in the loss of 250 jobs, the company said in a story posted on its Web site late on Monday.

Rueters

[PChamp119 96]

Funny, I didn't know people liked to celebrate people losing their jobs... how childish. Just cuz they write an article about Auburn (which is their job)...

[bigsixfive 327]

They're cutting production workers, not journalists. That's not all that great, pretty sad actually. The sleazy journalist gets to keep his job while the worker that prints his smear is getting laid off.

[Weagle98 119]

Funny, I didn't know people liked to celebrate people losing their jobs... how childish. Just cuz they write an article about Auburn (which is their job)...

249140[/snapback]

Oh there are plenty of jobs in this economy, they will find work. Now I see why you have PC in your name.

And there job is not to write smear pieces but to report actual news. Something the NYT has much difficulty with.

[Boonan 0]

Yeah, and it's not like it's because people don't like what they read. It's because everyone gets their info from the internet and don't want to bother paying for an old fangled paper. Papers are going through a slow death process. It just means there will be even more comglomerates in the future and a handful of writers deciding what the news is.

[DKW 86 7,425]

Yeah, and it's not like it's because people don't like what they read. It's because everyone gets their info from the internet and don't want to bother paying for an old fangled paper. Papers are going through a slow death process. It just means there will be even more comglomerates in the future and a handful of writers deciding what the news is.

249159[/snapback]

Excuse me?

Want to try that logic again? Dude, there are more news outlets on the web than the old dinosaurs like the NYT can compete with. There are blogs going up everyday. Carptians Quarters, RealClearPolitics, Democratic Underground, DailyKOS, VodkaPundit, etc. They are the real power brokers today. It has left the NYT in the dust. As papers got larger and larger they became less and less controllable. A web outfit is now like a ferrari to the NYT's Yellow Cab. The topic life cycle is now about 36 hours on average. For some stories it is about 3-4 days. Large papers just cannot compete with that stuff.

The other fun stuff is that papers can come out with a story, Rathergate, and get analyzed 1,000 times before they can respond. It has raised the bar and will continue to do so. They better get it right the first time. Just look at our NYT story. The NYT problem is that the old arrogant writing is dying out. The article we had was a smear piece the day they decided to write it. As Will Collier points out, it was half written before they ever even bought the plane ticket. But 10 years ago, we had no ITAT, Will Clooier, AUNation, etc. Now, when there are questionable things said, they get analyzed, tore apart, etc.

Point: with the Internet, everybody can become a journalist, all you need is a website (Contact E&E Webhosting ), a computer, and web access. There will be far MORE media outlets than ever, not fewer.

[TitanTiger 20,491]

Funny, I didn't know people liked to celebrate people losing their jobs... how childish. Just cuz they write an article about Auburn (which is their job)...

249140[/snapback]

You know he wasn't celebrating it in that way. He was simply poking fun that the NY Times is losing subscribers and having to shrink the size of its paper. Get the stick out of your rearend.

[mcgufcm 4,101]

laughing or faux laughing at lost jobs is dumb. simple as that.

dkw, don't you think you're overstating it juuuuust a touch? are there more news outlets now than ever? yes... if you know where to look. the fact is a smaller percent of people in this country read blogs than news papers. that percentage is young and will grow with time, but there is no way you can call blogs "the real power brokers" in today's news world.

and sadly, i'll bet the percentage of people that get their news from msn.com, cnn.com, or foxnews.com (along with their tv companions) is MUCH higher than newspaper or blog readers. you want the real power brokers in today's news world? look to the worst in the business, and you'll have your answer.

[abrnfanatc 6]

Funny, I didn't know people liked to celebrate people losing their jobs... how childish. Just cuz they write an article about Auburn (which is their job)...

249140[/snapback]

You know he wasn't celebrating it in that way. He was simply poking fun that the NY Times is losing subscribers and having to shrink the size of its paper. Get the stick out of your rearend.

249182[/snapback]

In an unrelated story, it has been reported that Warren St. John has been teaching the Times employees in seperate directed spelling courses and many of them didn't even show up for work on those days. This on the heels of the 1931 tobacco farm expose scandal has rocked the worls of the Times and we fully expect an audit from the FCC in the weeks to come.

[TitanTiger 20,491]

laughing or faux laughing at lost jobs is dumb. simple as that.

He was doing neither. He was simply laughing at the reduced influence and subscriber base of the NYT. Stop assuming motive that wasn't intended.

[Boonan 0]

Yeah, and it's not like it's because people don't like what they read. It's because everyone gets their info from the internet and don't want to bother paying for an old fangled paper. Papers are going through a slow death process. It just means there will be even more comglomerates in the future and a handful of writers deciding what the news is.

249159[/snapback]

Excuse me?

Want to try that logic again? Dude, there are more news outlets on the web than the old dinosaurs like the NYT can compete with. There are blogs going up everyday. Carptians Quarters, RealClearPolitics, Democratic Underground, DailyKOS, VodkaPundit, etc. They are the real power brokers today. It has left the NYT in the dust. As papers got larger and larger they became less and less controllable. A web outfit is now like a ferrari to the NYT's Yellow Cab. The topic life cycle is now about 36 hours on average. For some stories it is about 3-4 days. Large papers just cannot compete with that stuff.

The other fun stuff is that papers can come out with a story, Rathergate, and get analyzed 1,000 times before they can respond. It has raised the bar and will continue to do so. They better get it right the first time. Just look at our NYT story. The NYT problem is that the old arrogant writing is dying out. The article we had was a smear piece the day they decided to write it. As Will Collier points out, it was half written before they ever even bought the plane ticket. But 10 years ago, we had no ITAT, Will Clooier, AUNation, etc. Now, when there are questionable things said, they get analyzed, tore apart, etc.

Point: with the Internet, everybody can become a journalist, all you need is a website (Contact E&E Webhosting ), a computer, and web access. There will be far MORE media outlets than ever, not fewer.

249181[/snapback]

I was talking about the freaking print media.

[Weagle98 119]

laughing or faux laughing at lost jobs is dumb. simple as that.

He was doing neither. He was simply laughing at the reduced influence and subscriber base of the NYT. Stop assuming motive that wasn't intended.

249238[/snapback]

Thanks Titan. Some people are just looking to be offended.

I wasn't laughing at the people who lost their jobs I was looking at the fact that an organization that is lying about my beloved university is loosing revenue.

[Captain Liger 0]

Sure are a bunch of whiners in here.

[WAR-MATT 2]

The NYT's top competiton now will be The Enquirer and The Globe.

[DKW 86 7,425]

When rathergate broke who found the errors and then blew CBS away? in case you dont know Rathergate himself is crawling around cable shows now.

Online is the way to go, as far print papers, if they went away, other than paper folks who would care? They litter the landscape, they cost us trees, etc

[PChamp119 96]

Funny, I didn't know people liked to celebrate people losing their jobs... how childish. Just cuz they write an article about Auburn (which is their job)...

249140[/snapback]

You know he wasn't celebrating it in that way. He was simply poking fun that the NY Times is losing subscribers and having to shrink the size of its paper. Get the stick out of your rearend.

249182[/snapback]

I think you are all alone on this one. Everyone I have asked at the office I had read this guys' post and they all said the same thing I did. And I work at a major corporation with intelligent and Auburn people. So forgive me for thinking he was laughing for the "wrong" reason. Get the stick out of yours...

[GalensGhost 0]

Funny, I didn't know people liked to celebrate people losing their jobs... how childish. Just cuz they write an article about Auburn (which is their job)...

249140[/snapback]

You know he wasn't celebrating it in that way. He was simply poking fun that the NY Times is losing subscribers and having to shrink the size of its paper. Get the stick out of your rearend.

249182[/snapback]

I think you are all alone on this one. Everyone I have asked at the office I had read this guys' post and they all said the same thing I did. And I work at a major corporation with intelligent and Auburn people. So forgive me for thinking he was laughing for the "wrong" reason. Get the stick out of yours...

249326[/snapback]

No, he's not alone. You've got a stick up your butt.

I wish the NYTimes would go out of business and all the editors/writers would end up working as busboys at truckstop diners. I with the Tuscaloosa News would go out of business and the next time I drove through McDonalds, I had the pleasure of Cecil Hurt asking me if I wanted fries with that.

And that has little to do with Auburn. Their stance on that issue just makes it more enjoyable when they go in the toilet.

[BigAppleBucky 0]

I was dismayed and saddened to read that article last week. But please don't blame the messenger. Clean up whatever needs cleaning up and move on.

Good luck to Auburn this football season. Not impossible Badgers and Tigers will play another post-season game this year, but probably not. Far more likely we'll run into each other during an early season baskketball tourney down in Texas.

I enjoy the NY Times and Newsday every morning. Five mornings a week on my 65 minute train ride and the other two over breakfast. When they stop printing in NJ, maybe I'll get a later edition since I'm on Long Island.

[AWK 0]

I was dismayed and saddened to read that article last week.  But please don't blame the messenger.  Clean up whatever needs cleaning up and move on.

Good luck to Auburn this football season. Not impossible Badgers and Tigers will play another post-season game this year, but probably not. Far more likely we'll run into each other during an early season baskketball tourney down in Texas.

I enjoy the NY Times and Newsday every morning. Five mornings a week on my 65 minute train ride and the other two over breakfast. When they stop printing in NJ, maybe I'll get a later edition since I'm on Long Island.

249344[/snapback]

Welcome to AUNation!

[TitanTiger 20,491]

Funny, I didn't know people liked to celebrate people losing their jobs... how childish. Just cuz they write an article about Auburn (which is their job)...

249140[/snapback]

You know he wasn't celebrating it in that way. He was simply poking fun that the NY Times is losing subscribers and having to shrink the size of its paper. Get the stick out of your rearend.

249182[/snapback]

I think you are all alone on this one. Everyone I have asked at the office I had read this guys' post and they all said the same thing I did. And I work at a major corporation with intelligent and Auburn people. So forgive me for thinking he was laughing for the "wrong" reason. Get the stick out of yours...

249326[/snapback]

I'm not all alone, you just happen to work with people who think like you, which given the content of most of your posts around here isn't exactly a compliment.

Get a sense of humor and quit assuming the worst of people.

[Weagle98 119]

fogetaboutit

[mcgufcm 4,101]

dkw, you're not going to get a lot of folks around here to say "i love the times! if they went under i'd be sad!" so asking the question of who would care if newsprint went away is pandering to an audience you know you've already got in your corner; HOWEVER i assure you that millions of people would miss the times or the washington post or the ajc or whatever big city newspaper they choose to read if said paper were to go out of business.

it's why the fad of books on tape or papers online or cds on itunes or whatever else you want to add can't completely replace its predecessor: people want to HOLD something in their hands. why do people still paint when there's little money in it? because you're creating something real. why will newsprint continue to exist after it adjusts to the new marketplace? because people like holding the paper and reading the printed word... not just words on a screen. it's just not the same. so if the times went under, i'd miss it. if newsprint went away, i'd miss it. sorry if i'm alone in that.

oh and to the folks that said i was assuming a motive or intent that wasn't there... he did it indirectly. whether he meant to do that or not, he still found humor in a situation that cost people their job (in a very expensive area). the fact that he didn't intend it just shows that he didn't take the time to think it through before he typed out his post. that's his mistake, not mine.

[DKW 86 7,425]

dkw, you're not going to get a lot of folks around here to say "i love the times! if they went under i'd be sad!" so asking the question of who would care if newsprint went away is pandering to an audience you know you've already got in your corner; HOWEVER i assure you that millions of people would miss the times or the washington post or the ajc or whatever big city newspaper they choose to read if said paper were to go out of business.

it's why the fad of books on tape or papers online or cds on itunes or whatever else you want to add can't completely replace its predecessor: people want to HOLD something in their hands. why do people still paint when there's little money in it? because you're creating something real. why will newsprint continue to exist after it adjusts to the new marketplace? because people like holding the paper and reading the printed word... not just words on a screen. it's just not the same. so if the times went under, i'd miss it. if newsprint went away, i'd miss it. sorry if i'm alone in that.

oh and to the folks that said i was assuming a motive or intent that wasn't there... he did it indirectly. whether he meant to do that or not, he still found humor in a situation that cost people their job (in a very expensive area). the fact that he didn't intend it just shows that he didn't take the time to think it through before he typed out his post. that's his mistake, not mine.

249362[/snapback]

I was speaking as an enviromentalist and no one thinks they will all go away. Go to any business site, meeting, conference you will immediately hear about the paperless office. Paper costs money, it is expnsive, and mostly avoidable. We will always have paper stuff, but lets be frank, would it really hurt if we went to a near paperless society? Papers are online now anyway.

[PChamp119 96]

Oh I have a huge sense of humor. But I know if I brought on this kind of article, you would all jump on me based on my "past posts." The Auburn fans on this board, have a right to their opinion. But I agree with Finebaum that a lot of the Auburn fans get wired up over something anti-Auburn and act childish about things. Had the NYT wrote this article about Bama instead of Auburn, you would be asking for more reporters. So because it's job is to bring out the news (and they did bring out facts did they not - so they exploited Auburn, does that mean the article was wrong to come out? Auburn's sociology department MAY have a problem and they brought it out to the public - that is their job, so get over it), the Auburn fans get all upset. Anyone with a common sense would see this from an unbiased view, and that's how I work. I love Auburn but things like this happen and you have to understand it and realize that Auburn may not be perfect. Everyone has flaws

And btw, I work for a very respectable company with people that know how to have fun and have more than a sense of humor than you could imagine. They are very intelligent and work hard. Where do you work - McDonalds... oh wait, you administer a website

[TitanTiger 20,491]

Oh I have a huge sense of humor. But I know if I brought on this kind of article, you would all jump on me based on my "past posts." The Auburn fans on this board, have a right to their opinion. But I agree with Finebaum that a lot of the Auburn fans get wired up over something anti-Auburn and act childish about things. Had the NYT wrote this article about Bama instead of Auburn, you would be asking for more reporters. So because it's job is to bring out the news (and they did bring out facts did they not - so they exploited Auburn, does that mean the article was wrong to come out? Auburn's sociology department MAY have a problem and they brought it out to the public - that is their job, so get over it), the Auburn fans get all upset. Anyone with a common sense would see this from an unbiased view, and that's how I work. I love Auburn but things like this happen and you have to understand it and realize that Auburn may not be perfect. Everyone has flaws

The ire people have for this fish wrap was not that the story was done, it was the slip shod manner in which it was done. If that distinction has escaped you, you need to put down the bong and clear your head.

They selectively quoted players to fit their paradigm for the story, they omitted pertinent facts that shed a different light on some of the specific player situations, they left out contextual information that changes the perception greatly of what's going on, they dragged in irrelevant past events that reflect negatively on Auburn while ignoring very relevant current ones that actually pertained to academics...players like Obomanu who graduated in 3 years and was taking Masters level courses his senior year to remain eligible...I could go on and on regarding the ways this was less of an informed piece of journalism and more of a hatchet job but you'd still be a boob and defend them because you lack the critical thinking skills required to pick up on such nuances.