Editor outlines changes in print version of The Times

In a letter to readers in today's paper, Editor Russ Stanton introduces upcoming changes to the print version of the newspaper, while noting the breadth of coverage The Times continues to provide in print and online. Stanton's message is below; an inventory of the changes can be found in the posting that follows this one.

The future of the Los Angeles Times, in print and online, rests in our ability to meet the needs of our readers and deliver news and information that is unique, far-reaching and indispensable. In-depth journalism remains our hallmark and we are committed to that mission in the face of economic challenges to our industry and our nation as a whole.   

For proof, look no further than today’s front-page story on California’s war on wildfires, the first of a five-part series. It is news of vital importance to Southern Californians and it took a team of talented reporters, photographers and graphic journalists working on two continents to produce.  Latimes.com, which is increasingly becoming the destination of choice that busy readers turn to for breaking news coverage, also brings the series to multimedia life.

Our website just recorded its biggest month ever in June with 115 million page views, a 50% increase over last year.  Readers flocked to our online coverage of the overturning of the ban on gay marriage and the Lakers playoff run, and to a new database honoring California residents who lost their lives in the line of duty during the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan. They also embraced our new Olympics, Technology, Countdown to Crawford, and The Big Picture blogs.

[More of the editor's note follows the jump.]

On the print side, we’ll be focusing on perspective and analysis while still serving as a comprehensive daily news report.  And we’re undertaking changes, some of which have already begun.  Dan Neil’s Pulitzer Prize-winning “Rumble Seat” car column, for example, has moved to a new home in Friday’s Business section. Next week, the Home section will move to Saturdays and will combine with Real Estate, bringing “Hot Property” and “Man of the House” together.  And the paper’s Sunday Calendar line-up will now include a new Arts & Books section, combining the best of Arts & Music with Book Review (turn the page for a complete guide to the upcoming changes).

In the coming weeks, you can continue to look forward to more world-class coverage. At the Beijing Olympics, we'll have a team of more than a dozen reporters, editors, photographers, videographers and mobile bloggers detailing developments in the competition and in China itself. And our political team will be in Denver to cover the Democratic convention and in the Twin Cities to cover the Republicans as the major political parties take the next step in campaign 2008. 

We are dedicated to covering these and other stories of importance to Southern Californians with the kind of journalism that The Times -- the largest news gathering organization west of the Mississippi River -- is uniquely able to deliver.

-- Russ Stanton, Editor

Comments

[Disappointed reader]

Do what you must, but know that you are gutting the newspaper and people notice. Since nobody has figured out how to make a profit online, why are you gutting the print version so there's less incentive to subscribe. I'm cancelling my weekly and going to the weekend. Getting rid of the Thursday Calendar (which then became The Guide) was the DUMBEST thing you did. I don't want to spend 30 minutes surfing websites when i could flip through the print edition in 5 minutes and see if there was anything interesting going on - concerts, bars, restaurants, kids, and random stuff...
With this kind of leadership and lack of foresight, good luck, you'll need it to control the death spiral on the way down.

[Disappointed former subscriber....]

If it walks like a duck and quacks like a duck - its a duck.
I recently gave up and cancelled my subscription. The paper's staff and content has been greatly diminished since Zell took over and there is no end in sight. The editor's words are nice - but its just putting lipstick on a pig...

[reader]

I'm loving the changes because it doesn't involve a redesign, but I'm very upset about The Guide. I would keep the convenient tabloid in my car so that on a moments whim I would have an idea for somewhere to go, a book to buy or a cd to download.

If the print edition could just harness the uniqueness that is has to be 1. Sovereign from the Internet 2. Be able to print untimely yet amazing investigative reports and features.

I think that further changes are unwarranted. Get more in-depth news coverage on hospitals and the infrastructure (you can use multimedia to make it even better). Less coverage on celebrity gossip and you've got a winning combination.

[plankbob]

Spin it how you will, the owners' commitment to journalism and reader needs is going downhill.
But hey, so is America and particularly its middle class. Is there a connection?

[Vicki Broach]

How will these changes improve the paper and increase susbcribers? They won't. I'll probably cancel and switch to the New York TImes.

[joe]

Somehow I can't see how cutting content makes me more likely to read the Times. I spend less and less time with it.

[casey coryell]

The LATimes is still the only rival to the NY Times. I am in Atlanta, and the LA Times is a daily read for everyone. The news coverage is great, the financial news often has a fresh angle, and the architectural coverage is without peer in the world. I know papers are struggling, but I think you are doing great.

[Trojan Rim Rat]

You can spin it anyway you like, but nobody's fooled. The Times is being dismantled and is quickly becoming an irrelevant, pathetic shell of itself.

I'm a veteran journalist -- and not a Tribune employee -- who's subscribed to the Times for three decades. What I see is paper so desperate to save a few bucks that it's practicing Civil War medicine: amputation as prophylaxis.

You can't cut the stuff people want to read -- horse racing, Throttle Jockey, the Guide, a decent Books section ... ugh, I just can't go on -- and pretend you're doing us a favor!

Come on, guys. I WANT to keep subscribing, but you're doing everything you can to discourage me.

[Leanne Twidwell]

Unfortunately, the Opinion/Book section was the part of the Sunday paper I looked at first...thoI still resented the fact that the Times had jammed two worthwhile sections into the ridiculous right side up, upside down format. Now,even that will be gone forever. But we're still stuck with all the fashion/hollywood garbage fueled, I'm sure, by local PR agents, so it's cheap to produce. I am THIS far from dropping our subscription, but I hate to add to the death of newspapers.Can anyone tell me why Mr. Zell believes that reducing the quality of the product will drive up sales?

[David Jankowski]

George Steinbrenner will spend any amount of money to have a world championship trophy in his office. If his team also makes money - great. But what he really cares about is having the best baseball team in the world.

Unfortunately, the Chandler family stopped caring about a great newspaper and, instead, decided to sell out. Doubly unfortunate is the fact that the Times was sold to a publicly traded company that has made a business out of trying to create shareholder value through mediocre products. Chicago used to be a great newspaper town and the Cubs haven't won squat in forever. I rest my case.

Triply (is that a word?) unfortunate is that the man masquerading as a white knight is even more driven by greed than the Tribune. Zell cares about making money - he could give a rat's behind about owning a world-class paper. And please note that a world-class paper doesn't have to cover the world. I'd settle for a paper that does a world-class job of covering LA or SoCal, but the Times doesn't even deliver that anymore (did it ever?).

As long as Zell is running the show he will hire people with a mandate to make profits at the expense of everything else. He'll cut content, which will result in subscribers bailing out, which will result in advertisers bailing out, which will require more content to be cut ... it's a death spiral.

And the last thing I want to do is read the web. I spend my entire work day in front of a computer. Why would I want to spend even more time on the computer to read my newspaper.

[calwatch]

The elimination of the stock tables is one of those things that make a newspaper feel less like a newspaper. Sure, very few people actually used them, but they made the paper a newspaper of record, of the day's events. What's next? Dropping the out of town box scores? Oh wait, I don't want to suggest any ideas.

[calwatch]

And to answer the question about other papers, the LA Times is slipping on its enterprise coverage. The flagship San Francisco Chronicle has turned from being a complete joke to becoming a decent paper. The Oregonian and the Seattle Times produce stellar work, worth a look on the web when you have the time. The Denver Post could be a great paper during the cycles when Dean Singleton wants to earn a Pulitzer. Even the pedestrian Dallas Morning News actually turns out not to be so bad after all. Basically, the LA Times will no longer stand out as best in the west and be about as good as the Seattle Times, with worse local coverage to boot.

[Anabel Adams]

So why not lose the silly Image section and keep Opinion and Book Review -- probably at a net savings of paper, and certainly a huge gain in worthwhile reading.

[Another One Bytes the Dust]

Killing the already flip-flop Books/Opinion sections is my last straw. I've been patient, but now I'm gone for good. Good being my old hometown favorite--the New York Times. At least they have great Book Review and Op-Ed pages. Those sections are why I got up Sunday mornings. Bye!

[Times subscriber]

Nice work pulling the print version of the Guide. Guess I'll be looking to the LA Weekly to find out what's going on around town...

[Mercedes]

There are certain parts of the paper that I enjoy, you keep hacking away at them and I guess I will just have to stop buying the paper!

Mercedes

[Harvey Dater]

Mr. Stanton:

Your response to the paper's problems sounds suspiciously like the logic used by commanders during the Vietnam War...we had to destroy the village to save it.

While I recognize the fact that Sam Zell is an idiot when it comes to newspapers you are not. Yet, it seems the only solution management at the Times can come up with is to cut, cut, and cut some more. Rather than destroying what was once a gem of a newspaper why don't you put more resources into it?

Frankly, I believe improving the quality of journalism in the paper will bring readers back. And, while I do not profess to be an expert it seems to me that if readership goes up so will advertising revenue.

The Los Angeles Times was once among the worlds great newspapers. Since the Tribune Company bought it the paper has been on a downhill slide. Since Sam Zell bought it that slide has turned into an avalanche.

The solution is not to drive people to the internet. Most of us already spend too much time using computers every day. I, for one, do not like reading any more than I absolutely must on a computer screen, even though I have a very large monitor.

Stop ruining the paper. Spend your time fixing it. Find a local buyer that actually cares about the legacy of the Times, and pull it out from under the terrible management of Sam Zell and his idiot non-journalist management team. Despite my dislike of everything Rupert Murdoch stands for politically, I should think he would be a better owner for the Times than Sam Zell.

If you continue to cut the paper eventually you will get it down to one or two pages, then who will give a damn? Actually, who gives a damn now?

I used to read the Times daily, along with other papers, but the Times was the go to paper for me. Now, in order to get the news I have to read the New York Times, the Washington Post, Newsweek, Time, and The Economist. The Los Angeles Times is getting lower and lower on this list. Soon I will be just another former subscriber. After over forty years I should think that would worry you more than what Sam Zell thinks, simply because the readers are the customers, not ownership.

You should be ashamed to be a part of the destruction of a civic treasure!

Sincerely,

Harvey Dater

[Steve Bortko]

Not printing the Guide has made me seriously consider canceling the paper! Now the Thursday thru Saturday papers go right into the recycle bin, and I find more and more the Sunday paper is joining them. No Guide makes the Weekly even more important as the LA Times doesn't seem to realize that people in Los Angeles care about weekend activities in Los Angeles. Nice work!!