Message me
The Old Grey Lady makes a play for local ad dollars in the Windy City.
The New York Times plans local edition in Chicago
mediadecoder.blogs.nytimes.com - 7 weeks ago - 1024 views
17 Comments Have your say. Vote up the best responses. ↓
Reactions on the web
Latest tweets linking to this story (Share url: http://windycitizen.com/weeH)
Latest tweets linking to this story (Share url: http://windycitizen.com/weeH)
Invite your friendsExplore this story
People: Diane C. McNulty | Warren Hellman
Organizations: Bay Area | University of California, Berkeley
Top Media Stories This Week
5
Comments
This is huge. We have two major papers in serious trouble and the largest paper in the nation is moving in. I really don't like the idea of a single news source trying to dominate in many major local sources. Especially when people from the NYT newsroom will be writing local Chicago news, even if it is just for a short period of time.
I've never wanted the Trib and Sun-Times to be doing well again so badly.
Reasons why this is a good idea:
1) The Times has a lot of readers in Chicago. Might as well have a section for them that will cement you as their daily paper of choice.
2) The Times has a small editorial presence here and regularly puts out Chicago-focused stories. Might as well organize it into a local section.
Questions:
The Tribune pwns the NYTimes on local stuff. The NYTimes pwns the Tribune on national stuff. What's a more attractive product: a national paper with a few pages of local or a local paper with a few pages of national?
The Tribune's own actions show that they'd see this NYTimes as a stronger product...because it's essentially the RedEye approach. The Tribber's tout the research that led them to create RedEye, it told them people wanted national stuff with just a few local highlights...which sounds like the composition of the new NYTimes edition.
If it leads to more Chicago web content, that's only a win for the WC. More stuff to aggregate!
I'd rather have the NYT for its national coverage than the Tribune for its local coverage. Chicago's a global city with global interests. I'm moderately interested in "local" news, but I'm much more interested in things that aren't here. And for things "local," I'm mostly focused on stuff to do, arts, entertainment, food, etc. Not so much the "news."
I don't think that the RedEye and NYT are playing in each other's market. RE is a Chicago-based tabloid. The NYT is a NYC-based, Ivy-infested paper of record.
Agreed. It'll be interesting to read responses from execs at the Tribune and Sun-Times, whose own research shows that there's a large audience for the sort of product the NYTimes seems to be talking about.
I'd much rather get the NYT than the Tribune or Sun Times. Nothing personal, but the NYT has a lot more value. The writing is excellent, the Sunday Magazine always is a tremendous read (and makes me wonder why they don't sell it as a stand alone subscription), there's more content in it on a daily basis and the trend stories they have are generally more interesting and unique.
It depends on what kind of offer they make to new subscribers when they ramp up their marketing, but I'd at least consider a Sunday NYT, if only for the magazine.
Their national coverage is great. But something about a national paper covering local bothers me. I just wish the Tribune or Sun-Times would pick up their game and get to the NYT level with a local focus.
I may just be more stubborn about giving up major Chicago names for more New York names though, and this may be a great thing for everyone.
It ain't no different than ESPN opening up ESPNChicago.com. Frankly, it's no different than the Tribune having a special section for DuPage County for DuPage subscribers. (Do they even do that any more?)
Kind of. There's a section called Chicagoland Extra that varies depending on what suburban area you live in. They have local stuff in there like meeting briefs about city council/village board meetings, local events, human interest stories, etc.
Reminds me of when they made "Marshall Fields" "Macys"...
Well, I guess this makes the NYT the new Tribune, and the Tribune will be the new Sun-Times. And the Sun-Times will be the paper Daniel Burnham, Marshall Field and the first Richard J. Daley read in Chicago history Valhalla.
Who knows -- it may turn into some freelance work for local writers. And the NYT is a nice clip to have, no?
Anyone know how many editorial staffers they have in Chicago right now?
People still have "clips"? I kid.
On that topic, any idea what their freelance rates are?
He he he, you read my mind. Even more drool-worthy is the part that said they would eventually have a local partner to produce the content. I hope that happens sooner rather than later and I hope they'll be hiring... :-)
It occurred to me that if Chicago gets the Olympics, the Chi-Town wing of the Times would probably be doing a butt-load of hiring to cover it.
No surprise here. If there's going to be a print survivor, an NYT as a national paper is one logical possibility. They can get a lock on the upscale market along with the Journal and FT. A local edition helps build the audience and is a pretty minor incremental cost to them. I might subscribe.
Not as newsworthy you might think. Regular readers recognize infrequent contributions from the New York Times' Chicago Bureau & Sunday's Chicago Life Magaizine.
As with Plains, Georgia under President Jimmy Carter & Little Rock, Arkansas under President Bill Clinton, Chicago's overdue for its own fifteen minutes of fame with the election of President Barack Obama.
On the other hand publishing the Times' Chicago edition may be more an attempt to expand the advertising base than an acknowledgement of Chicago's importance to Big Apple residents.
Will the New York Times recruit prolific Windy Citizen power users? It probably depends as much on your valued insights in to national public policy as the occassional clever turn of phrase.
Great. That's all we need. Another left-wing paper that only knows spin and won't report the actual news.
Post new comment