VoyForums

VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1234567 ]


[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:24:17 07/13/16 Wed
Author: lowest percentile
Subject: Re: Online only PG
In reply to: Bow Tie Follies 's message, "Re: Online only PG" on 21:04:14 07/11/16 Mon

If the PG were actually trying to target the 1%, wouldn't the paper hire writers who can write with at least some degree of sophistication? The New York Observer targets the 1% with urbane, stylish, witty prose. I am not a member of the 1% but would be inclined to spend $2 for the PG if the writing were not consistently clumsy, amateurish, and flat.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]


Replies:

[> [> [> [> Re: Online only PG -- Dem O' Graffick, 00:36:05 07/14/16 Thu [1]

I think they want to TARGET the 1% with their story focus but without spending a hell of a lot of money. Your view is totally on target, but the other problem is the PG is slicing away sections people have long enjoyed. On Thursdays, PG's Weekend section is diminished to the point it's no better than the Trib's Ticket. But you still pay $ 2 a pop as opposed to 75 cents.

"Urbane, stylish, witty prose" is what the Observer is about yet it's beyond the scope of the PG. Do Shribman's Sunday musings qualify? Hardly.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]


[> [> [> [> [> Re: Online only PG -- Conductor, 12:51:16 07/14/16 Thu [1]

No need to spend 75-cents for the Trib. Like clockwork Ticket shows up every Thursday in the mail.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Re: Online only PG -- The revolution will not be edited or even lazily proofread, 13:48:47 07/14/16 Thu [1]

Maybe the PG needs to target the older reader who buys news in print form. I'm that sure that the demographic skews toward the over-60 segment. The PG needs to give its readership what the readership wants, not what the editor wants. The only editor who ever got away with giving readers what he, the editor, wanted was William Shawn. The guy in charge of PG is no William Shawn. Right now, the paper is more like a vanity operation.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Online only PG -- Jedediah Leland, 05:02:48 07/15/16 Fri [1]

The only thing the PG obsesses about is digital, digital digital. Of course they just lost the editor-savior whose somewhat overblown vision was going to take them digital. She was smart enough to see where things were going and bailed. She's not alone. Some of what gets into the print PG is determined by how similar stories play digitally. Print should still be a big factor here since a lot of older people prefer a physical paper. That doesn't matter to the powers that be. Cut back home delivery, they say. In its own way it's indeed a "vanity operation." Its publisher likes to delude himself into thinking he's creating his version of the New York Times. He's not. The PG is collapsing and they don't have a clue how to proceed. Charging more per copy and offering less won't work. That simple logic seems beyond their Ivy League comprehension.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Online only PG -- loss follower, 10:55:37 07/16/16 Sat [1]

Do the editors at the PG even read the New York Times? Sentence by sentence, phrase by phrase, the PG has nothing in common with the Times. Reading the PG, especially the softer features, is like reading the writing of undergraduates.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Online only PG -- Jedediah Leland, 16:49:16 07/16/16 Sat [1]

You're right, of course. The NYT fixation, including the ridiculous courtesy titles that ape the Times, were not Shribman's idea but John Robbie's. He thinks prestige will save the PG even as the writing grows more pathetic by the week. They can't even keep a Deputy ME for long! I don't think buyouts will be required to get more people to leave. Younger staff are heading for the doors, and who can blame them?

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]





VoyUser Login ] Not required to post.
Post a public reply to this message | Go post a new public message
Note: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.
* HTML allowed in marked fields.
Message subject (required):

Name (required):

  Expression (Optional mood/title along with your name) Examples: (happy, sad, The Joyful, etc.) help)

  E-mail address (optional):

* Type your message here:


Note: This forum is moderated -- new posts are not visible until approved.

Notice: Copies of your message may remain on this and other systems on internet. Please be respectful.

[ Contact Forum Admin ]


Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2017 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.