Why don’t they start by axing Pinch and see how things go from there?

The New York Times is firing 8% – 100 employees – from its newsroom staff. I have a number of friends and relatives at the paper and, while I can’t stand what the publisher has done to his family’s heritage, I certainly don’t want to see my friends suffer for Pinch Sulzberger’s awful incompetence. But that’s usually how family-run businesses work, and this once good paper will probably end up with Pinch and his sisters sitting around an otherwise-empty newsroom, playing paper. Too bad.

4 Comments

Filed under Uncategorized

4 responses to “Why don’t they start by axing Pinch and see how things go from there?

  1. Anonymous

    that’s a lot of folks sitting around, pulling stories from HuffPo and the Kos, and waiting for calls from Obammy, Reid and Pelosi.

  2. Anonymous

    Objectivity and analytic skills of journalists have always left much to be desired, even in the pre-Net era when these businesses would print cash, no matter incompetence or conflicts of interest (advertisers, political leanings of writers/editors/owners)

    Will be fun to watch the death of Old Media profitability and equity value…creative destruction indeed

  3. I subscribed to the NYT for over 20 years. I finally pulled the plug last year when they ran a front page smear piece on Cindy McCain three days before the election.

    It couldn’t be happening to a nice bunch of a-holes.

  4. The Duke of Deceptiom

    The Duke reads the Times fairly regularly — it is not a bad idea to know what your enemies are up to.

    The down side is that one occasionally thows up in one’s mouth.