The Times doesn’t need Eli Broad

Based on this quote, I think one of the worst things that could happen in Los Angeles is for Eli Broad to buy the Los Angeles Times.

It’s important that [LAT] be considered one of the four most important newspapers in America and that we as Angelinos ought to have a paper of that quality.

Nation and world news is a commodity. There are too many companies doing it, it’s too easy to get, and the New York Times and Washington Post have cornered the market on quality. It’s not fool hardy to compete on quality, but why, when LA so badly needs great local coverage? LA is such a huge market with so much potential for great local coverage, and big revenue, — why not focus on that? Why worry about being a great journalistic institution on the world stage when you can just own your monster local market?

This entry was posted in Uncategorized and tagged by . Bookmark the permalink.

3 thoughts on “The Times doesn’t need Eli Broad

  1. Too much world news? Hmmm, On the Internet yes, it has become a commodity, but still “owned” by a few. National news. That could be dropped by many newspapers in their print product, with one caveat – investigative work. That isn’t being duplicated online, for obvious reasons (it’s a lot of work and time to do for free) and will remain NOT a commodity.

Leave a Reply