Local developer buys San Diego U-T

[LongTimeListener]

But, Papa Doug said he wouldn't ... wait ... oh, no ... That sound you hear is perception working its way down the shirthole:
http://jimromenesko.com/2012/01/22/u-t-san-diego-owner-uses-his-paper-to-push-waterfront-plan/

That was unreal. I don't think the story had a byline, but I wouldn't be surprised if the thing was written by the private equity firm's marketing department.

 

[fishwrapper]

I don't have a problem with a newspaper owner using his paper to support his private agenda.

I'm hopeful that maybe this guy has some success at it so other developers will discover that owning the hometown newspaper is good for your bottom line.

Papers -- and particularly the journalists who staff them -- have nothing else to lose.

Well, I guess, if you discount credibility.

 

[spaceman]

This is no different than what the Chandlers did with the LA Times. No different.

 

[Baron Scicluna]

There's history going back hundreds of years of owners using their newspaper to promote their own point of view.

Doesn't always mean it's right, though. And I found the U-T's comment ridiculous:

"That is our priority, each and every day. That is the focus and mission of the newsroom. This is an editorial campaign being launched by our publisher and the editorial pages, which is separate and distinct from the newsroom operations."

Separate and distinct? Yeah, surrrree. Who decided it would go on the front page?

 

[fishwrapper]

This is no different than what the Chandlers did with the LA Times. No different.

Show me the time Norman or Otis ran an editorial on A1.
That is one difference.

Another is it isn't 1950 or 1960.

 

[joe king]

This is no different than what the Chandlers did with the LA Times. No different.

Show me the time Norman or Otis ran an editorial on A1.
That is one difference.

Another is it isn't 1950 or 1960.

No, it's 2012, when newspapers are selling ad space on the front page.

 

[fishwrapper]

This is no different than what the Chandlers did with the LA Times. No different.

Show me the time Norman or Otis ran an editorial on A1.
That is one difference.

Another is it isn't 1950 or 1960.

No, it's 2012, when newspapers are selling ad space on the front page.

I do realize that.
And I would hope a journalist could realize the difference between selling ad space on the front page and selling *the* front page.

 

[TigerVols]

This is no different than what the Chandlers did with the LA Times. No different.

Show me the time Norman or Otis ran an editorial on A1.
That is one difference.

Another is it isn't 1950 or 1960.

No, it's 2012, when newspapers are selling ad space on the front page.

That is, when they are not going out of business.