Letters to the Editor: On L.A. Times layoffs, readers talk subscribing, political slant and preserving journalism
To the editor: Having subscribed to the Los Angeles Times for many years, I read with concern that cuts had to be made to newsroom staff.
The Times has an excellent team of seasoned reporters. Where else can one get reliable information about what’s going on in the city and in our government, including the City Council, local school boards and the California Legislature? The Times also provides fine coverage of business, sports and entertainment.
My favorite part of the paper, aside from the Jumble, is the Opinion page, where I get to learn the thoughts of many people, including columnists and letter writers. Some of these people are very bright; others, I suspect, may not read The Times quite so carefully.
We can all play a role in keeping our Los Angeles Times going strong by renewing our subscriptions, encouraging others to subscribe and, if one can afford it, by gifting a subscription to a younger family member or friend.
David Michels, Encino
..
To the editor: When The Times’ new ownership took over in 2018, I was hopeful that your paper would become more fair and balanced and attract an expanded reader base.
That appears not to have happened. Even the sinking CNN appears to be seeing the light.
Although I do enjoy glancing at the headlines of your stable of liberal columnists, I look forward to the day that I will enjoy more than just your world-class sports section.
Rob Buller, Mission Viejo
..
To the editor: This year I celebrate 50 years as a daily print subscriber. Even as the paper has shrunk and shrunk in recent years, I’ve continued my subscription to support the extraordinary individuals who bring me my hometown news.
How do you lay off the stellar staff photographer Kent Nishimura? Or the young, vibrant staff trying to bring the woeful digital space into relevance? Or the editors, copy editors and other staff shockingly laid off this week who help make the paper make sense?
I love the ritual of reading my daily paper cover to cover. When there’s no more left between the covers, a nearly inevitable result of these penny-wise, pound-foolish layoffs, what exactly am I paying for?
I am sad for those laid off. I am sad for my city. And I am sad for me. Find another way.
Cathy Kay, Sherman Oaks
..
To the editor: Maybe, just maybe if The Times had a more balanced political reporting, you would attract a larger readership and increase subscriptions. I can’t imagine that you have too many Republican readers.
Bob Case, Simi Valley
..
To the editor: I am, and will continue to be, a supporter of The Times and newspapers in general. However, it pains me to pay hundreds of dollars more each year for your paper when its current form is a shell of the news coverage that your paper used to deliver.
Cutting more newsroom jobs hardly seems to be a solution to a declining subscriber base.
Your Opinion section discussed the California Journalism Preservation Act, which might reverse the downward spiral for print publications. Every subscriber should lobby our Legislature to pass that law.
Ray McKown, Torrance
..
To the editor: Freedom of the press as guaranteed by the U.S. Constitution won’t mean much if the press disappears as an honest and fact-based sector.
The news business can still be a good investment, and newspapers and other news outlets don’t need to lose money to exist. But, as fact-based journalists are replaced by an industry increasingly supported and controlled by advertising dollars and political messaging, real news will eventually disappear.
Aren’t there maybe some creative ways to prevent this? For example, try bifurcating a newspaper into two related companies: one a community-supported, fact-based, 501(c)(3) tax-exempt journalistic entity, financially secure and protected from undue influence, and a second profit-oriented entity.
Otherwise we’re headed toward a world where the only information available will be based on profitability or politics.
Les Hall, Santa Ana
