NYT to cut paper size and close plant

[AWK 0]

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.

249375[/snapback]

The article was a smear job. PC, you talk about having an unbiased view, but you did you notice how this article was meant to do nothing more than hurt Auburn Universities reputation. No offense, but who cares If he indriectly might have/could have/shouldwouldacouldablahblah laughed at someone who lost their job. I am 100% sure that PC has never had his foot in his mouth, due to the fact that his head is usually stuck up someones rear end.

[PChamp119 96]

blah blah blah - yea they left out information Obomanu and whatnot, but did they ever say that all the athletes were like this? Why would they mention that when they don't have to. When Auburn was put on probation back in 93, should the article have mentioned how great the University was and that the players that weren't corrupt should be awarded and honored? Same goes for Alabama - I think they should mention every football player that did not take money (and don't put in a joke and say 'well thats cuz there werent any'). It's because it is not what matters - the article was talkin about a specific set of players who took some courses that should maybe raise some eyebrows and that is it. That's how news works - yea they leave out information, but if Auburn hadn't done this in the first place we wouldn't have anything to talk about now would we? I will defend the writer in the fact that he was doing his job. Would it have been nice if he mentioned some positive stuff, sure - but I am not going to cry about it like you guys are.

Maybe our great APR score article should mention the GPA and what classes our students take - throw in some negative. Since you are so much about having the entire story come out and all. Our student-athletes aren't the smartest in the world, but they try their hardest and do well. But everyone thinks Auburn is this super-intelligent program all of a sudden, when they aren't. We deserve to be mentioned for having a great APR score, but don't think for a minute that our players are more intelligent than those at Vandy and Stanford and Duke. THAT ARTICLE WAS MISLEADING!! EVEN IF IT WAS POSITIVELY!

[GalensGhost 0]

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.

249360[/snapback]

I wonder if he was one of the 12 people who gave Gundlach a round of applause yesterday?

As opposed to the 12,000 that were giving him a round of middle finger, that is.

You know those 12 are clearly smarter than the rest of us.

[GalensGhost 0]

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]

Feed them fishheads.

They shouldn't work for a traitorous rag like the NYT. Find an honorable job. I would not care to work for an organization hellbent on destroying this country and I don't really care two hoots in a tornado if the paper closes and the building burns to the ground.

Feel the same about the Tuscaloosa News.

Your bleeding heart is making a mess all over your sleeve.

[otterinbham 0]

It's obviously divine retribution for the Grey Lady's decision to smear Auburn football, the very symbol of all that is good and right in this world.

But merely shrinking the paper's staff and dimensions is not good enough. By gum, we should not rest until the New York Times is shuttered, the presses dismantled, and the building used for low-income housing. Only then will the world's journalists be put on notice, finally aware of what happens to those who besmirch our holy institution.

For they have all sinned against us, by not scheduling GameDay on our campus, by reporting our player DUIs (In themselves, the works of diabolical interests opposing that of Auburn), and the ultimate outrage of not putting us in the 2004 BCS Championship Game. Let them rend their garments and cry out in shame, now that they have recognized how the New York Times is paying for their trespasses against us.

[saniflush 0]

What he said.

[GalensGhost 0]

But don't think for a minute that our players are more intelligent than those at Vandy and Stanford and Duke. THAT ARTICLE WAS MISLEADING!! EVEN IF IT WAS POSITIVELY!

249403[/snapback]

And just why the hell not? Is it your contention that Auburn players don't have the capacity to be more intelligent or perform at a higher level than those at other schools?

Maybe the courses at those other schools -- in all departments -- are inherently more difficult. Maybe freshman English is more difficult at Duke than at Auburn. Perhaps a player at Duke who might have made an A at Auburn makes a B at Duke. Ooops! Duke's APR is lower.

Or maybe you're just a racist. Is it because Auburn's players are black? Is that why they can't be expected to measure up to Stanford or Vandy?

Your attitude SICKENS me.

[TitanTiger 20,492]

blah blah blah - yea they left out information Obomanu and whatnot, but did they ever say that all the athletes were like this? Why would they mention that when they don't have to.

When you spend 7/8ths of an article talking about athletes, but only focus on the ones that you think look fishy AND you don't point out some of the specifics of their situation that might change the perception...such as Carnell's playing career being over, you have given and wrong perception and only a dumbass could have done that by accident.

When Auburn was put on probation back in 93, should the article have mentioned how great the University was and that the players that weren't corrupt should be awarded and honored?

Difference: those were proven allegations. This moron selectively quoted players to make things look fishier than they were and wrote the article in such a way as to make it seem like this was all about athletes getting special treatment when a fuller presentation of the facts show that not to be the case.

That's how news works - yea they leave out information, but if Auburn hadn't done this in the first place we wouldn't have anything to talk about now would we?

No, that's how people with agendas work, not how actual news works. You present the case, with context and don't blow it up to be something it isn't, nor minimize it to be less than it is. Are you this dumb for real?

I will defend the writer in the fact that he was doing his job.

Only if that job is to sensationalize things and slant them for maximum effect no matter who it misrepresents.

Would it have been nice if he mentioned some positive stuff, sure - but I am not going to cry about it like you guys are.

When you mention the APR scores, then only discuss a few cases (97 course hours over a 3-5 year period) that call that into question, it is only honest reporting that would make you also point out that Auburn had some players who graduated early that also contributed to the high score.

Maybe our great APR score article should mention the GPA and what classes our students take - throw in some negative. Since you are so much about having the entire story come out and all.

We don't write a newspaper. And even so, the players' majors are available to anyone who can read. The APR score would have come out regardless of us issuing a press release on it.

Our student-athletes aren't the smartest in the world, but they try their hardest and do well. But everyone thinks Auburn is this super-intelligent program all of a sudden, when they aren't. We deserve to be mentioned for having a great APR score, but don't think for a minute that our players are more intelligent than those at Vandy and Stanford and Duke. THAT ARTICLE WAS MISLEADING!! EVEN IF IT WAS POSITIVELY!

249403[/snapback]

It wasn't misleading. 97 hours, from 18 players (5.4 hours per player), over a 3-5 year period (1.35 credit hours per player per year avg.) is not going to inflate an APR that was taken for one year of that time period.

[AWK 0]

It's obviously divine retribution for the Grey Lady's decision to smear Auburn football, the very symbol of all that is good and right in this world.

But merely shrinking the paper's staff and dimensions is not good enough. By gum, we should not rest until the New York Times is shuttered, the presses dismantled, and the building used for low-income housing. Only then will the world's journalists be put on notice, finally aware of what happens to those who besmirch our holy institution.

For they have all sinned against us, by not scheduling GameDay on our campus, by reporting our player DUIs (In themselves, the works of diabolical interests opposing that of Auburn), and the ultimate outrage of not putting us in the 2004 BCS Championship Game. Let them rend their garments and cry out in shame, now that they have recognized how the New York Times is paying for their trespasses against us.

249409[/snapback]

(Satire much?)

Yeah I guess you are right. We should let people walk all over Auburn, give us a bad name, and stomp all over the University until we have nothing. This thread was meant as a joke, J-O-K-E. No one said that someone losing a job is funny or that Auburn should never have any bad press even if it is true. Grow a pair and stop worrying about whats politically correct.

[TitanTiger 20,492]

It's obviously divine retribution for the Grey Lady's decision to smear Auburn football, the very symbol of all that is good and right in this world.

But merely shrinking the paper's staff and dimensions is not good enough. By gum, we should not rest until the New York Times is shuttered, the presses dismantled, and the building used for low-income housing. Only then will the world's journalists be put on notice, finally aware of what happens to those who besmirch our holy institution.

For they have all sinned against us, by not scheduling GameDay on our campus, by reporting our player DUIs (In themselves, the works of diabolical interests opposing that of Auburn), and the ultimate outrage of not putting us in the 2004 BCS Championship Game. Let them rend their garments and cry out in shame, now that they have recognized how the New York Times is paying for their trespasses against us.

249409[/snapback]

I don't recall even one complaint from anyone on any Auburn board about any paper reporting the DUI situations or any other where some AU player got himself into trouble.

I mean, hyperbole is fun sometimes, but it should have some semblance of truth to it or it doesn't really work. Try again.

[tombigbeetiger 223]

this is not the time to be fighting with each other....we are a family and right now our goal is to survive and kick ass this fall....i got banned from ITAT yesterday because of a rant i went about,of all things, paul finebaum....i just lost it because all these people bitch and whine about what he says about AU and everyday they turn him on ...they are just like the perverts that go to the cathouse to get whipped and beat and abused and enjoy it....what are they called...masochists?...so, lets all keep things in the proper perspective and our players had a higher apr than gordon gee's precious bunch of eggheads at vandy,even if the classes in question were eliminated...our players are not dumb...ask brodie

[rolltoomer 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]

He's a uat'er.

Actually didn't know he could post anything other than "MoooAgEwe" and tired stuff about the AU-Vanderbilt series.

[AURainman 6]

The NYT cutting jobs is sad for those who need the job.

But, those NYT apologists out there need to get their act together. Reporting SOME details that fit your story, yet leaving the ones out that don't isn't reporting.

Its propoganda.

If you believe withholding information pertinent (sp?) to the story is okay, then you have a sadly skewed view of the world.

Things they could have included:

1. Most academic institutions have at least SOME crip courses.

2. Only 18/85 scholarship players EVER took one of these classes.

Things they SHOULD have left out:

1. A retelling of all of Auburn's dark moments in sports. (Totally irrelevant).

2. Any connections to the athletic department at all. (Even Gundlach himself stressed that he never implied athletes received special treatment. So why make this an athletics issue?)

Easy. It makes a bigger splash. It gets 117 NCAA programs scrambling, because 117 NCAA programs now have to look more closely at whether their players are taking easy classes or not.

The NYT manufactured a story that could've happened anywhere on any D1 campus in the USA. Why Auburn? That's what I wanna know.

Don't defend the NYT. They aren't reporting. Their smearing Auburn and its gonna leave a mark. They are running YOUR alma mater into the ground because it sells papers. They are doing a complete "Michael Moore" to Auburn University and you wanna bend over and take it.

[otterinbham 0]

It's obviously divine retribution for the Grey Lady's decision to smear Auburn football, the very symbol of all that is good and right in this world.

But merely shrinking the paper's staff and dimensions is not good enough. By gum, we should not rest until the New York Times is shuttered, the presses dismantled, and the building used for low-income housing. Only then will the world's journalists be put on notice, finally aware of what happens to those who besmirch our holy institution.

For they have all sinned against us, by not scheduling GameDay on our campus, by reporting our player DUIs (In themselves, the works of diabolical interests opposing that of Auburn), and the ultimate outrage of not putting us in the 2004 BCS Championship Game. Let them rend their garments and cry out in shame, now that they have recognized how the New York Times is paying for their trespasses against us.

249409[/snapback]

I don't recall even one complaint from anyone on any Auburn board about any paper reporting the DUI situations or any other where some AU player got himself into trouble.

I mean, hyperbole is fun sometimes, but it should have some semblance of truth to it or it doesn't really work. Try again.

249429[/snapback]

Who said it was hyperbole?

[TitanTiger 20,492]

You are an odd duck.

[tombigbeetiger 223]

Don't defend the NYT. They aren't reporting. Their smearing Auburn and its gonna leave a mark. They are running YOUR alma mater into the ground because it sells papers. They are doing a complete "Michael Moore" to Auburn University and you wanna bend over and take it.

=====================================================

and it didn't work for the democ-rats and it ain't gonna work now

[otterinbham 0]

You are an odd duck.

249470[/snapback]

And you're a condescending prig. We make quite the pair, don't we?

As a matter of fact, there were quite a number of letters to the sports editor of the Birmingham News when Sears was brought up on charges. The familiar whines were heard about bias against Auburn, etc., ad nauseum.

Now I agree that the New York Times performed a hatchet job. However, rejoicing that the Times is cutting loose administrative personnel, copy editors, and pressmen isn't exactly the sine qua non of graciousness, wouldn't you agree? Hardly befitting Auburn fans at all, I might add.

[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]

He's a uat'er.

Actually didn't know he could post anything other than "MoooAgEwe" and tired stuff about the AU-Vanderbilt series.

249453[/snapback]

What? I have no clue what you are talking about

[TitanTiger 20,492]

You are an odd duck.

249470[/snapback]

And you're a condescending prig. We make quite the pair, don't we?

As a matter of fact, there were quite a number of letters to the sports editor of the Birmingham News when Sears was brought up on charges. The familiar whines were heard about bias against Auburn, etc., ad nauseum.

Now I agree that the New York Times performed a hatchet job. However, rejoicing that the Times is cutting loose administrative personnel, copy editors, and pressmen isn't exactly the sine qua non of graciousness, wouldn't you agree? Hardly befitting Auburn fans at all, I might add.

249483[/snapback]

How many letters does the News print typically? Four, maybe five? Contrast that with virtually no one that I've seen complaining about it being covered on any Auburn site I can think of. Your take was overblown.

And you only see me as condescending because you're beneath me.

[GalensGhost 0]

Now I agree that the New York Times performed a hatchet job. However, rejoicing that the Times is cutting loose administrative personnel, copy editors, and pressmen isn't exactly the sine qua non of graciousness, wouldn't you agree? Hardly befitting Auburn fans at all, I might add.

249483[/snapback]

Fishheads. Feed them fishheads.

[DKW 86 7,425]

Now I agree that the New York Times performed a hatchet job. However, rejoicing that the Times is cutting loose administrative personnel, copy editors, and pressmen isn't exactly the sine qua non of graciousness, wouldn't you agree? Hardly befitting Auburn fans at all, I might add.

249483[/snapback]

Fishheads. Feed them fishheads.

249514[/snapback]

G2, does that come from Hairspray? Someone told me it did, I have no clue.

I think the problem with this thread is the gratuitous HAHAHAHAHAHAs on the description. I dont think HAHAHAHAHA whatever. I just think it is kind of the inevitable flow of things in business. We lament the fading away of passenger trains. We have them, but no one uses them. We have nice greyhound buses. No one uses them.

We have papers, but they are moving ever faster online.

[GalensGhost 0]

Now I agree that the New York Times performed a hatchet job. However, rejoicing that the Times is cutting loose administrative personnel, copy editors, and pressmen isn't exactly the sine qua non of graciousness, wouldn't you agree? Hardly befitting Auburn fans at all, I might add.

249483[/snapback]

Fishheads. Feed them fishheads.

249514[/snapback]

G2, does that come from Hairspray? Someone told me it did, I have no clue.

I think the problem with this thread is the gratuitous HAHAHAHAHAHAs on the description. I dont think HAHAHAHAHA whatever. I just think it is kind of the inevitable flow of things in business. We lament the fading away of passenger trains. We have them, but no one uses them. We have nice greyhound buses. No one uses them.

We have papers, but they are moving ever faster online.

249537[/snapback]

I don't know where it comes from. It was a popular saying when I was in high school. ___ 'em and feed 'em fishheads. It was used in a dismissive manner.

[swensks 0]

The NYT cutting jobs is sad for those who need the job.

But, those NYT apologists out there need to get their act together.  Reporting SOME details that fit your story, yet leaving the ones out that don't isn't reporting. 

Its propoganda.

If you believe withholding information pertinent (sp?) to the story is okay, then you have a sadly skewed view of the world.

Things they could have included:

1.  Most academic institutions have at least SOME crip courses.

2.  Only 18/85 scholarship players EVER took one of these classes.

Things they SHOULD have left out:

1.  A retelling of all of Auburn's dark moments in sports.  (Totally irrelevant).

2.  Any connections to the athletic department at all.  (Even Gundlach himself stressed that he never implied athletes received special treatment.  So why make this an athletics issue?)

Easy.  It makes a bigger splash.  It gets 117 NCAA programs scrambling, because 117 NCAA programs now have to look more closely at whether their players are taking easy classes or not.

The NYT manufactured a story that could've happened anywhere on any D1 campus in the USA.  Why Auburn?  That's what I wanna know.

Don't defend the NYT.  They aren't reporting.  Their smearing Auburn and its gonna leave a mark.  They are running YOUR alma mater into the ground because it sells papers.  They are doing a complete "Michael Moore" to Auburn University and you wanna bend over and take it.

249456[/snapback]

Awesome post, whoever you are.

And ease up on the guy that started the thread. I seriously doubt that his first thought at reading this story in the news was "Sweet...people are losing their jobs and that makes me happy."

[japantiger 4,051]

The NYT announcement should have read:

Big Business outsources jobs to China and India....

If the NYT's layoffs were being reported about an automotive company, that is what the NYT would have reported. The facts are they are shutting down US based printing jobs so they can keep foreign bureaus open in India, China and other parts of the world. The NYT is a big business that is hurting the American worker...where is the outrage at the 'times actions to "do what is needed to restore profitability" (code for screw the workers)..... "

The 'times has no interest in the truth...the truth doesn't sell.... they only care about reports that sell papers...that is what drives their business.... who protects us from the "free press"?