By: Joe Strupp The Los Angeles Times revealed in today's paper plans to end its Outdoors section after Dec. 6, a move the paper's top editor explained as a cost-cutting move. Times Editor Dean Baquet did not rule out future job cuts as the company struggles with higher costs and declining circulation.
"I made the decision that, instead of nibbling around the edges of the paper, it made more sense to make one thing go away," Baquet said in Tuesday's paper. "Something had to go. It was a question of what."
The paper reported that Baquet, who took over the top post from John Carroll several months ago, "decided to cut the section in the face of higher newsprint costs, flat revenue, competition from the Internet and other pressures common to many newspapers." It added that he made the decision for budgetary reasons only, and called the section "one of the most inventive sections in any major newspaper."
"Rather than cutting local, national, and international news coverage, Baquet said he chose to eliminate the feature section with the content that could most easily be shifted to other parts of the paper," the Times reported.
Baquet and Associate Editor John Montorio informed staffers of the decision at a meeting Monday. The editor did not say if layoffs would follow, the paper reported. "I told them I needed a little more time to figure that out," he said.
Speculation about layoffs has swirled among Times staffers for the past few weeks. Robert Scheer, a longtime columnist at the paper who was let go last week, noted on the Democracy Now radio program Monday that the Times is planning on "laying off 70 people this week."
Tuesday's Times story about the Outdoor section noted only that "there will be further cuts at The Times in coming weeks, Baquet said, but he declined to elaborate."
A call to Times spokeswoman Martha Goldstein about possible layoffs was not returned Monday.
The Outdoors section is produced by a 10-person staff and has been running since September 2003. The paper reported Montorio saying that at that time, "it seemed like a perfect ... section for Southern California." But it added that the section did not attract advertisers and a poll of readers found only some 28% looked through Outdoors regularly.
"I'm not sure it ever reached the [intended] market," Montorio told the paper. He added that Times editors hoped to keep staff members, who have "performed admirably."
Comments
No comments on this item Please log in to comment by clicking here