LA Observed writes that the Los Angeles Times distribution is down to 842,432 (average daily circulation). That is down significantly from 18 or so months ago (907,997).

The reasons are of course many though in our opinion the paper leaves far too much to be desired–particularly with its columnists (who we believe are simply not of the caliber of yesteryear’s).

The plight of the Times reminds me of the record business who for far too long as pointed at piracy and other things not in its control all the while not coming to grips with the fact that people just aren’t excited about what is being promoted and released. The record business also failed to realize that many decades of arrogant dealings had left them with no friends and few constituents. Ditto with radio, TV, and movies when they are in their slumps. How many people really like the printed news media organizations? How many of us enjoy getting dinnertime phone calls from a pushy Times solicitor even though we were already a subscriber? Was it really necessary for them to be as aggressive in using phone solicitation as they did over the past two decades and if so at what cost?

As for the Times, case in point is the business section. Once a proud part of the paper, it has now shrunk so far that if you want to know what is going on business-wise in the Southland, the LA Business Journal is a must-read. On the national level, good luck getting by without the Journal. How the heck this happened is anyone’s guess. Michael Hiltzik’s columns don’t cover business as often as not (a topic that we debated with him here and on his blog). The one thing that we agreed with Michael is that the section deserves more than the few pages it now gets but neither of us is in a position to do anything other than bitch about it.

So where does it go from here? Down, if you follow Kevin’s story links at LA Observed. The fact of the matter is that if you want to place a classified ad, the web is a superior medium. Same goes for stock quotes and sports scores. Stories like the Parisian riots have been far better covered via Yahoo News than the Times. That said, the paper is perfectly positioned to provide analysis and perspective in a way that an immediate web posting won’t be able to do. But that places a great weight on the Times writers, editors, and columnists and we do not feel they have been up to the task. Last I saw the Times was considering adding a gossip column as if that will have a chance against the likes of Defamer.

The Times’ Hiltzik (and Lopez in an earlier email to us) would both write us off as anonymous screwballs not worth bothering with–other than the occasional response to a comment or post. We are indeed anonymous and we are in fact screwballs however when subscribers are dropping out at the rate of 1,000 a week or so perhaps this isn’t necessarily the best attitude two have toward 2 of 842,000 and representative of many more.

I hope the Times does improve. I grew up reading it and am of the generation that enjoys holding a paper while I read. I do Soduko everyday and thank them for adding that earlier this year. All in all it doesn’t have to be perfect–just better. As they say, bad circulation can kill you.

technorati: los LA tribune

This entry was posted on Monday, November 7th, 2005 at 11:01 pm by Insider and is filed under Los Angeles Times. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. Both comments and pings are currently closed.