http://www.editorandpublisher.com/eandp/news/article_display.jsp?vnu_content_id=1000442560
A look at a speaking engagement of NY Times Sulzberger. His criticism of Chicago's "Red" papers is a bit silly. NY is a very different place that Chicago or DC (Express). Is he saying that the NY Times is better than all those papers (Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times)?
I think it is important to say that the Times reader is not going to read that kind of paper. Then again it also doesn't make economic sense for him to go after that market when the Daily News and the NY Post are already involved in a long circulation war. DC and Chicago doesn't have this problem of a competative market (The Post is a monopoly [no the Washington Times does not compete], the Tribune and Sun-Times carved up the broadsheet and tabloid markets for themselves), hence the big dailies pursue the "red" paper.
A look at a speaking engagement of NY Times Sulzberger. His criticism of Chicago's "Red" papers is a bit silly. NY is a very different place that Chicago or DC (Express). Is he saying that the NY Times is better than all those papers (Washington Post, Chicago Tribune and Sun-Times)?
I think it is important to say that the Times reader is not going to read that kind of paper. Then again it also doesn't make economic sense for him to go after that market when the Daily News and the NY Post are already involved in a long circulation war. DC and Chicago doesn't have this problem of a competative market (The Post is a monopoly [no the Washington Times does not compete], the Tribune and Sun-Times carved up the broadsheet and tabloid markets for themselves), hence the big dailies pursue the "red" paper.
posted by Spud at 10:00 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home