Evangelicals on NYT pg1 today, Santorum on mag cover -- reader revolt?

[DeepModem Mom]

This post is not for those who stopped reading the Times long ago, or who would remind of their role in the Clinton-Lewinsky witch-hunt, or Judith Miller, or their biased political coverage, particularly the demonizing of Al Gore, or any number of their serious sins of omission and commission. There are still NYT articles posted every day in LBN that otherwise would not see the light of day. My view is we're better off with them than without them. (I think their coverage of important matters is more valuable than the Washington Post, less valuable than the Los Angeles Times.) But I'm supposing that today's paper is the result of the recent internal committee report reported here by our friend Ms. Seelye:


New York Times recommends ways to improve trust
By Katharine Q. Seelye The New York Times
TUESDAY, MAY 10, 2005

In order to build readers' confidence, an internal committee at The New York Times has recommended taking a variety of steps, including having senior editors write more regularly about the workings of the paper, tracking errors in a systematic way and responding more assertively to the paper's critics.

The committee also recommended that the paper "increase our coverage of religion in America" and "cover the country in a fuller way," with more reporting from rural areas and of a broader array of cultural and lifestyle issues. The 16-page report was to be made available on the Times company's Web site, www.nytco.com.

The committee, which was charged last fall by Bill Keller, the executive editor, with examining how the paper could increase readers' trust, said there was "an immense amount that we can do to improve our journalism."...


SO today, May 22, an article about the rise in class and power of Evangelicals dominates the area above the fold on page one, and Rick Santorum appears on the cover of the Times magazine. Guess what, NYT -- the readers you are chasing are NEVER going to read the NYT, anymore than Fox viewers are going to watch a Fox-clone CNN. Meanwhile, NYT natural readership is disparaged by the just-retired public editor, Daniel Okrent. (And if the Times wants a clue to its natural readership, they have only to look each day at their list of most e-mailed op-eds -- Krugman, Dowd, Rich -- and articles -- good reporting that gets at the truth behind the Bush shams.) The extreme minority faction they are chasing already controls all branches of our government and most of our press, and is aiming to control all of our national institutions. They do not need aid and succor from the New York Times.

I plan on letting the Times hear from me. If they continue with a front-page dominated by religious reporting, and news from the "Heartland," they will lose my subscription and quick. I'd ask other DUers who still read the Times to join me.

[DeepModem Mom]

1. a little Sunday kick --

[Doctor_J]

2. nyt announced two weeks ago they're going to go more RW

this is no shock

[DeepModem Mom]

3. No, but I may cancel my subscription as a protest, wishing them luck...

in replacing me with a conservo, which will NOT happen.