jawa.mee.nu

November 15, 2006

WaPo to Put on Fresh Makeup, Hope for the Best

The Washington Post's executive editor, concerned about the paper's circulation freefall, has announced changes, big, big changes:

NEW YORK In a surprising memo to staffers today, Leonard Downie, Jr., executive editor, announced several general and specific shakeups "to maximize readership of the printed newspaper, build audience on the Web site and further reduce costs in the newsroom."
This includes a plan to "shrink" the newsroom. "tightening up the paper's news hole," cracking down on story length and moving reporters and editors "within and among staffs." The Post is now suffering from regular circulation declines.

Here's a suggestion: forget the cosmetics and get rid of the Democratic partisans who have been posing as journalists. Hire actual unbiased reporters and editors, though God alone knows where you'll find them.

Posted by: Bluto at 10:36 AM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 135 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Wasn't the New York Post the only major newspaper to have an increase in circulation? I wonder why the WaPo doesn't look at the steps the NYP took to increase circulation? Actually, I know why.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2006 11:40 AM (8PoNP)

2 Bluto vastly prefers the Washington Times to the Washington Post. Owned by Rev Sun Moon the Rev Moon has spent ~ 2 billion in subsidies keeping the Washington Post going since he founded it in 1982. The Unification Church picks up the tab for all losses. Perhaps Bluto the Washington Post should emulate that business model ? The Washington Times has only about 1/7th the circulation of The Washington Post.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Washington_Times

Posted by: John Ryan at November 15, 2006 12:31 PM (TcoRJ)

3 What's your point, John, and what does it have to do with the fact the WaPo is losing readers, along with every major liberal newspaper in the US, including the New York Times and the LA Times?

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2006 12:45 PM (8PoNP)

4 Sun Moon is a democrat.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 15, 2006 01:33 PM (R6qo5)

5 The point is that ...... more credit should be given to the blessed Rev Sun Moon for providing us with such a outstanding alternative ....? Of course declining newspaper circulation will continue as print succumbs to digital.
The New York Times has had a decline from 1,113,000 to 1,087,000 in 5 years a decline of about 5000 per year for a total loss of 25000, out of a million. However ad rates have gone up.
The Washington Post has had a somewhat larger decline but again ad rates have gone up.
We in the United States are fortunate to have as many media sources as we do. And in this free market the people will continue to choose to be customers of MSM

Posted by: John Ryan at November 15, 2006 01:44 PM (TcoRJ)

6 The NYT has lost over 35,000 readers in the last six months, JR, or 3.5%.

My source: The New York Times, http://www.nytimes.com/2006/10/30/business/media/31papercnd.html?ex=1319864400&en=e085b0aa9ab0ddb3&ei=5088&partner=rssnyt&emc=rss

We in the United States are unfortunate enough to still have grossly partisan liars posing as journalists at the NYT, WaPo, LATimes, Boston Globe, ABC, NBC, CBS, PBS, CNN. All have experienced declines in readership/viewership as more people get wise to them and seek alternative sources of information.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 15, 2006 02:00 PM (vBK4C)

7 Don't take that post to mean that I don't appreciate the implied surrender in your incredibly weak response to the original blog entry. Thank you for that.

Posted by: The Dread Pundit Bluto at November 15, 2006 02:02 PM (vBK4C)

8 The blessed Sun Moon. Ha, ha. Blessed with a bunch of idiots for followers.

Posted by: Greyrooster at November 15, 2006 02:11 PM (R6qo5)

9 John Ryan and the WaPo, NYT, LAT, and all the other liberal newspaper still don't have a clue. The point, John, is that there are too many liberal newspapers vying for too few liberal readers. This is what is causing the decline, among other reasons. You would think the "free market" of liberal newspapers would get the message and include another point of view, namely conservative. That would increase readership.

But, heh, I don't mind. The faster the influence of these newspapers declines, the better, as far as I am concerned. And John, you are right, most people still get their news from the MSM, but the quicker we change this, the better.

Posted by: jesusland joe at November 15, 2006 02:23 PM (8PoNP)

10 paygzq awvjkry jdcv rsexbfdja yeqkg nzypdftl opmga

Posted by: ohpzfsi jpivyrh at December 29, 2006 04:23 AM (xHzmC)

11 osmypkvq ethj lveqgb mnebaw kezhj djgqylcwx eqcwfjdm

Posted by: dqoniaye hlbamd at April 06, 2007 05:34 AM (J0Xhy)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Comments are disabled. Post is locked.

33kb generated in CPU 0.0173, elapsed 0.04 seconds.
34 queries taking 0.0295 seconds, 166 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

November 15, 2006

Recent Comments