Major Shakeout Looms for Top New York Times Editors (Pink Slips, Hope and Change!)

New York Mag ^ | 1/11/13 | Joe Hagan

[jimbo123]

The next two weeks are going to get tense inside the headquarters of the New York Times.

Last month, executive editor Jill Abramson told the staff she’d have to cut 30 positions from the news division to buffer against financial losses from rapidly declining advertising revenue. Reporters and editors would be offered buyouts, she said, but if she didn't have enough takers in a month’s time, she would be “forced to go to layoffs.”

As the January 24 deadline approaches, only two people, assistant managing editor Jonathan Landman and reporter Jacques Steinberg, have formally announced their exits.

[History Repeats]

But Obama got reelected. How can it be bad times if the savior has been put back in power?

They must be confused.

[bert]

So, the new business strategy is to have a party where a business is blackmailed and to follow the lead of Forbes and the Weekly Standard in hosting a cruise.

Lame,lame, lame.

[Brooklyn Attitude]

Couldn’t happen to a nastier bunch of America hating commies.

[EQAndyBuzz]

Now is the time to strike. List the top 5 NY Slimes advertisers and lets get boycott letters out to them.

This is what the Tea Party is for. The opportunity to take down the old gray skank is before us.

[rightwingextremist1776]

btt

[GBA]

You can be sure that the pure Marxists will remain.

That's my bet as well. It's a good time to purge themselves of the non-believer.

It's not the bottom line they seem to care about, it's the purity of their progressivism that's paramount.

[DesScorp]

LOL, especially all the debt from that ugly skyscraper they built.

[kenmcg]

Time magazine & NY Slimes losing money and jobs......LOL!!

[what's up]

They are actually EXPANDING the editorial section while SHRINKING the news division.

That's because they don't want to report on events during Obama's administration.

This is evil.

[Common Sense 101]

They are actually EXPANDING the editorial section while SHRINKING the news division.

At the NY Times, what's the difference?

[what's up]

The difference is now they can say what they want and say it's only "opinion".

Sure they did it before too but now they don't even need loose ties to everyday events and/or facts anymore.

[kevkrom]

Krugman will be the one who finally turns out the lights.

My money's on Maureen Dowd skulking in a deserted alley, writing screeds on post-it notes and slapping them on various places in Manhattan in a final bid to have any "circulation" whatsoever.

[onyx]

Wonderful news!

[BusterBear]

A good opportunity to get rid of all those pompous ass music critics, who wouldn’t be able to distinguish Jingle Bells from Mahler’s Fifth.

[hummingbird]

Schadenfreude anyone?

[hummingbird]

HA! HA! HA!

[GOPJ]

Krugman will be the one who finally turns out the lights.

There's something so sweet and fitting about that image...

[hummingbird]

"...buffer against financial losses from rapidly declining advertising revenue"

I thought they would say ObamaCare is eating them up.

What am I thinking? They would NEVER say that!

[GOPJ]

...then one day I realized it was just a lot of pretty sentences with no underlying substance...

Ya gotta give 'em that... they do write beautifully...

[hummingbird]

"Always knew there was a bunch of fellas walking around in women’s underwear @NYT."

Funny! Good song AND good parody!