Los Angeles Times to get rid of local news section…terrible idea?


Jay Rosen posted a tweet a few hours ago with a link to the LAObserved.com article “’California’ or ‘Business’?” by Kevin Roderick, in which Roderick expresses his utter disbelief at the insanity of the Los Angeles Times’ decision to get rid of its local news section.  Rosen calls the move an “odd decision,” but Roderick all-out pans the decision:

 Los Angeles Times staffers were told Friday by resigned editors that publisher Eddy Hartenstein realized there would be a sizable public backlash against his decision to kill the local news section, but that he felt getting rid of the Business section instead — as all top editors reportedly advised, even the current and last two Business editors — would harm the paper’s stature. It seems a tone-deaf stance by Hartenstein, given how little actual news the Business section offers most days. Call me crazy, but this was probably not the smartest Sunday to show upset readers how much the Business section has withered compared to its past award-winning years.

Roderick goes on to describe the main story in the business section on Sunday, “Eight great three-hour dates on a $25 budget.”  Roderick seems to imply, and I agree, that this is a laughable article considering the dreadful state of the economy.  Wouldn’t it be wiser to get rid of the business section, and incorporate especially interesting business stories into the local news section?

 As Chris Anderson explains in his book The Long Tail, the era of niches has officially begun, and one of these niches is local interests.  Why can’t the Los Angeles Times understand how utterly important it is to keep the local news section?  


One response to “Los Angeles Times to get rid of local news section…terrible idea?

  1. practicumpioneers

    The ONLY reasoning I could see for cutting the local section is that there probably are a ton of local niche publications that the LA times were already contending with. The big-wigs probably thought they were already on the losing side of the battle…but even that is pretty shoddy reasoning.

    However, that seems to be the current trend with most papers. They see the ship sinking and are throwing cargo overboard instead of patching the hole.

    For instance, what if a paper revamped their design to attract people? Or only offered certain content in the paper, that is alluded to on the website? I don’t know if that would work or not, but I DO know that cutting content is not going to help sales.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s