How will the New York Times appeal to overseas readers?

A useful start would be firing every member of the editorial board.

Because the standard head up arse New York liberalism of them all doesn’t play that well outside New York.

But this is a good example of their real and basic problem:

Will everyone’s workloads double now? No, says Kahn, who says that the daily URL output of the newsroom — 1,300-strong — won’t have to jump from 300 to, say, 350. It’s all about “looking for opportunities in the realm of what we’re reporting,” he says.

They’re producing 300 pieces from 1,300 reporters each day? Each reporter is expected to produce a little less than one piece each four days? What the fuck are they actually doing?

11 thoughts on “How will the New York Times appeal to overseas readers?”

  1. Free cash with every paper sold.

    They could put it inside the paper in a little plastic envelope –like the salt in those retro-style crisps.

    I’d buy it.

  2. Thus, and without exception, “serious” American papers are dull and self-regarding, with little humour, leaden prose (mags are better in this regard) and rather decaffeinated reporting.

    The written media doesn’t always get it right in Blighty, often gets it horribly wrong in fact, but dull and humourless it ain’t.

  3. So Much For Subtlety

    Because the standard head up arse New York liberalism of them all doesn’t play that well outside New York.

    I don’t know. I think that sort of liberalism is alien to America outside New York, but it plays well among Europeans. After all, the NYT is just what happens when you introduce a lot of Central and Southern Europeans to an English-speaking White-majority country. I am sure that the readers of the Guardian and a whole range of French and Italian newspapers basically agree with the NYT.

  4. Never really looked at the NYT before. Now I have, I never will again.

    Dull as fuck, awful design and a broad streak of the worst sort of hand-wringing lefty self-hatred. Reminds me of the Indy a bit.

    At least the Graun offers occasional (unintentional) laughs and decent sports coverage (esp cricket)…

  5. When I lived in NYC the NYT was so poor I used to read (on occasion) the New York Post and Daily News – Think the daily Express and you aren’t far off! Wall Street Journal was th best of a pretty ropey bunch it has to be said…..

  6. “serious” American papers are dull and self-regarding, with little humour, leaden prose … and rather decaffeinated reporting.

    And so it has been throughout my adult life. Earnest, preachy, grey, and heavily self-censored. I’d rather read Le Monde. I’d much rather read Le Figaro.

    I’d even prefer Die Welt though it’s decades since I could read German competently.

    I’d rather learn about the world from those Russian and Arab TV services. If the ruddy Vatican published a paper in medieval Latin I might even prefer a bash at that.

  7. If the quantity of stories per journalist is the only thing we care about I have a simple solution. For half of the current cost I will provide the desired 300 articles a day. From the comments I have seen my articles, like “How many times can I use bamboozled?”, will be far more popular than a story that took months to research.

  8. Pricing is also important.

    There’s one or two articles a week of interest to me (I live in Colorado) that I would probably pay $5 a month to access online. But my only subscription option is for all the content at a much higher price, most of which is only of interest to someone living or working in New York

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *