Comments on: Sulzfreude: New York Times posts record loss

By: Right Voices

Right Voices — Mon, 21 Apr 2008 19:41:14 +0000

In Order For There To Be A War Between Rupert Murdoch And The New York Times, Doesn’t Murdoch Need An Opponent?…

I mean really?!?! Just look at this line:
Murdoch’s reconceived Journal represents nothing short of a formal declaration of war on that most venerable of journalistic institutions, The New York Times.
The New York Times declared war on the rea…

By: misterpeasea

misterpeasea — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 06:04:56 +0000

So it’s not that people aren’t reading newspapers…they’re just abandoning the most liberal-leaning rags.

JetBoy on April 18, 2008 at 10:07 AM

Can’t remember where I’ve heard this (Rush? Ace?) but:

The folks putting out these liberal rags are doing it against all business principles. You don’t try to put out yet another liberal rag in a market full of liberal rags. That’s (in part) why FOX does so well, they have a whole market to themselves, to folks who want right-leaning news.

So funny: the leftists are always accusing the big eeevil corporations of Republican or conservative bias, but they’re slitting their own throats for just the opposite.

By: leftnomore

leftnomore — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 02:00:54 +0000

My question to the NYT is: aren’t you all about The Environment? Why do you condone cutting acres of trees a week for this dated news format? Get consistent, Sulz. You’re hypocritical tree-killers.

By: profitsbeard

profitsbeard — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:25:34 +0000

Payback for security traitors.

Rot in red ink, scumbags.

By: burt

burt — Sat, 19 Apr 2008 00:14:59 +0000

The nadir was Walter Duranty. They have managed to stay near the bottom since.

By: Dr. Charles G. Waugh

Dr. Charles G. Waugh — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 21:21:31 +0000

The Gray Lady sees red, predictably.

Better: The Gray Lady sees not read, predictably.

By: 2Tru2Tru

2Tru2Tru — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 20:14:05 +0000

I think they need to make it more absorbent and softer, to get me to switch from Charmin.

By: Steve Z

Steve Z — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:39:20 +0000

Id the New York Times lost $335,000 in a quarter, it would take a long time to blow through the fortune that the Times amassed during earlier generations, when they really reported the news. We’ll have Pinch to kick around for a long time to come, which might come in handy when New Yorkers walk their dogs and forget the Pooper-Scooper.

By: Al in St. Lou

Al in St. Lou — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 18:07:36 +0000

trigon on April 18, 2008 at 1:07 PM

From your lips to God’s ear!

By: trigon

trigon — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 17:07:02 +0000

If they sink low enough, Murdoch may buy the paper and manage to turn it around. That would be rich.

By: Rovin

Rovin — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:24:19 +0000

crr6 on April 18, 2008 at 11:32 AM

If the New York Times returned to policies that once made this “paper of record” a respectful readership by simply reporting the facts on their front pages and reserved the “analysis” to the editorial section, your point would be more credible. “Original reporting” by the NYT’s has evolved into nothing but tabloid “journalism” with a far left agenda. Reporters that do not toe the line of the Times agenda have the life-span of an Air America broadcaster.

By: Entelechy

Entelechy — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:21:18 +0000

Sulze-licious - the 'great' NYT has turned into a tremulous, gelatinous, flabby, but still delicious to some, slice.

By: CynicalOptimist

CynicalOptimist — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:12:37 +0000

Ding, Dong, the witch is dead…
The Wicked Witch is dead!!!!

Do you think the flying monkeys will celebrate?

By: libhater

libhater — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:12:31 +0000

This simply made my day!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

By: heldmyw

heldmyw — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 16:00:04 +0000

In a conference call with analysts, Janet L. Robinson, president and chief executive, said it was “a challenging quarter, one that showed the effects of a weaker economy,” compounded by “a marketplace that has been reconfigured technologically, economically and geographically.”

Ohhhh! It’s “weaker economy”, “reconfigured blah-de-blah”, and so on…

Nothing about the crap product that fewer and fewer are willing to but down their hard-earned money for.

Responsible for their actions? Not the NYT!

By: in_awe

in_awe — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:50:29 +0000

…of course on mowing day they’d just drop off some of their favored illegal immigrants to do the work

By: in_awe

in_awe — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:48:44 +0000

The Los Angeles Times has the same insidious bias in its new reporting, and is heading in the same direction.

Deservedly.

Cicero43

The LA Times keeps harrassing me to subscribe…they’ve got the price down to $1/week (7 days)…I’m waiting until they offer to mow my lawn, too.

By: crr6

crr6 — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:32:17 +0000

Fixed it!

Rovin on April 18, 2008 at 10:32 AM

alright. If you want your future originial reporting to consist of analysis as to whether or not Obama is giving Hillary the finger in a youtube clop, then by all means cheer the decline of major newspapers. The fact that this blog heavily relies on them for their original content pretty much negates your point anyway.

By: pocomoco

pocomoco — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:29:26 +0000

Pinch, Punch, Slam (or whatever the hell his name is) Sulzberger has a secret plan to save his paper by maximizing his profits.

He plans to reduce his circulation to one person then charge that person $10 million for each daily paper.

It could work.

By: RushBaby

RushBaby — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:22:50 +0000

Does anyone else look at Pinch and the NY Times and see Ellsworth Toohey and the NY Banner? (Besides Cuffy Meigs, I mean.)

misterpeasea on April 18, 2008 at 10:52 AM

Nice.

By: Cicero43

Cicero43 — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:13:11 +0000

The Los Angeles Times has the same insidious bias in its new reporting, and is heading in the same direction.

Deservedly.

By: avgourmet

avgourmet — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:09:21 +0000

Nice spin on “breaking even per share” With 140M shares outstanding the loss is about a 1/4 cent per share. There was no loss- it all rounds out to 0. Its almost like govt math

By: RBMN

RBMN — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:03:20 +0000

The New York Times’ problem is, conservatives that don’t have a voice in “America’s newspaper of record” get bitter, and start clinging to facts.

By: BowHuntingTexas

BowHuntingTexas — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 15:00:39 +0000

It’s BUSH & CHENEY’S fault! Blame it on BUSH & CHENEY!!!

Vntnrse on April 18, 2008 at 10:02 AM

I was thinking more along the lines of it being Bush’s tax cuts for the rich !

By: Bill Scrunty

Bill Scrunty — Fri, 18 Apr 2008 14:58:57 +0000

Does anyone else look at Pinch and the NY Times and see Ellsworth Toohey and the NY Banner? (Besides Cuffy Meigs, I mean.)

misterpeasea on April 18, 2008 at 10:52 AM

Except at least Toohey didn’t buy into his own BS, he was just out to make a buck. I think Pinch actually agrees with most of the garbage printed in his newspaper.