Tim Cavanaugh | May 12, 2005
Free tabloids are the first good journalism news in decades. So, asks Matt Welch, why is everybody in the newsroom so gloomy?
Reason needs your support. Please donate today!
Try Reason's award-winning print edition today! Your first issue is FREE if you are not completely satisfied.
(310) 367-6109
3415 S. Sepulveda Blvd.
Suite 400
Los Angeles, CA 90034
(310) 391-2245
Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of Reason.com or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment or disable your ability to comment for any reason at any time.
|5.12.05 @ 5:42PM|#
Cool article, Matt. I wish one of these new tabs would come to Phoenix. The Az Republic is a sure fire yawnfest, while the weekly New Times runs in the same well-trodden groove of most alt weeklies - everything is a would-be Watergate to them.
|5.12.05 @ 6:17PM|#
Yeah, the Colorado Springs Independent is like that too.
Fiercly Dogmatic.
The regular old newspaper, The Gazette, is pretty good though. They're owned by Freedom Communications.
http://www.freedom.com/
It's pretty cool to have a newspaper with a libertarian outlook on the editorial page.
|5.12.05 @ 6:37PM|#
Todd, what about the Tribune? You ever read that? When I was in Tempe I had a subscription to that piece of crap, and finally I got pissed and cancelled it. When the guy asked me why I was cancelling, I told him it was because there was no way the writers passed high school. He apologised, and I assured him it was not his fault.
And I thought the AZ Republic was bad (which it is). Garbage.
|5.12.05 @ 6:58PM|#
No, I never read the Tribune, and now I'm glad I didn't!
The writing in the New Times has gotten truly awful, in addition to the sorry content. There was an article a few weeks back on Absinthe, which sounded like it should have been good, but I couldn't get past the second paragraph. It was all some bozo trying to show off his cool credentials.
|5.12.05 @ 7:46PM|#
Yeah, I stopped reading any of the local rags some time ago.
|5.12.05 @ 8:03PM|#
Back when I was growing up I always considered the Seattle Times the more (mainstream) "liberal" paper and the Hearst-owned P-I the (mainstream) "conservative" one. Now it seems to me that both papers are almost indistinguishable, covering all the same stories with the same "progressive" agenda and opinions. The only thing different is the selection on the comics page.
Don't know if this is related to the JOA or just a reflection on the people being churned out by the Journalism schools....
Larry A|5.13.05 @ 12:24AM|#
Mainstream newspaper journalists shafted themselves when they all went "neutral" and "objective." If the news is all "neutral" then all the papers end up printing the same articles from the same wire service. So there's no reason to have more than one newspaper in a city.
By the time the San Antonio Light and Express News were duking it out, the main difference between them was the size of their Wingo Bingo prizes. The E-N was winning the circulation race when the owners of the Light bought it out and abandoned the Light. The change in ownership was not noticible in the E-N product.
Why are thes pros not warming to the upstarts? NIH. (Not Invented Here.)
|5.13.05 @ 10:19AM|#
I can't imagine how anyone can think that the Seattle Times and the Seattle P-I are reporting the same stuff. It's probably just coincidence that today's editions have the exact same headline.