Will Patterico Finally Cancel the L.A. Times?
I wanted to cancel the L.A. Times last year, after the paper ran an utterly disgraceful story dragging Tom DeLay’s dead father into the Terri Schiavo controversy. But Mrs. P. vetoed the idea. She likes to read the paper at the breakfast table in the morning.
But lately, she hasn’t been able to do that, because the paper isn’t getting here on time.
It’s 6:39 a.m. and the L.A. Times still hasn’t arrived on our driveway. Mrs. P. likes to read the paper shortly after 6.
I may soon join the large group of readers who count themselves as former L.A. Times subscribers.
OK, so what will you do? A significant portion of your blog consists of, er, correcting The Los Angeles Times.
I use The Philadelphia Inquirer as my newspaper of record, and it has provided some grist for the mill. I’m not a subscriber, but (usually) pick up a copy when getting my morning coffee at Turkey Hill on the way to work. I could just look everything up online version, and not spend a dime, but it’s just easier to have the print copy on hand for my uses.
Dana (3e4784) — 2/23/2006 @ 7:38 amThe LA Times should use Patterico’s continued membership as part of their ongoing subscription campaign. “Will P. keep reading us? The paper you love to hate!”
dchamil (c6cc47) — 2/23/2006 @ 8:37 amHow will you train your dog?
nittypig (4c1c43) — 2/23/2006 @ 8:43 amThis may help your decision:
http://www.nationalreview.com/dunphy/dunphy200602230753.asp
Troopship Berlin (d8da01) — 2/23/2006 @ 9:34 amI’m sure that Michael Hiltzik will be sorely disappointed….lol
Specter (466680) — 2/23/2006 @ 10:07 amKeep the subscription and file a class action against the LAT for knowingly and deliberately publishing false information. You’ve got the goods, haul their sorry rear ends into court and let them defend themselves.
Black Jack (d8da01) — 2/23/2006 @ 12:13 pmYour situation sounds like mine. I tried to convince my wife to cancel the Times over their coverage of the recal, but it took two months of terrible delivery to convince my wife to go along with it. (Of course, in our case, the paper was technically delivered, but it was on our grass and was getting soaked by the runoff from my neighbors sprinkler system, despite repeated notice to the Times of the problem).
Of course, after I cancelled the paper, the Times put be into collection because my father-in-law supposedly owed them money from HIS subscription (which he also cancelled). And they wonder why their circulation is down over 30 percent.
Sean P (256007) — 2/23/2006 @ 12:55 pmDo what I did.
Cancel the damn thing and they’ll keep sending it. And when they dare miss a week, demand that they send someone over with a replacement copy IMMEDIATELY.
I’ve been getting a free paper for months.
It’s the least they can do.
Tom (b943d4) — 2/23/2006 @ 1:43 pmI work as a carrier for one of the major papers (not going to say just in case they see this. I can tell you now that the delivery isn’t going to get better. Carriers are given $.09-$.14 per paper and most have routes of 300-500 papers to be delivered each day. Because of this most don’t want to put much effort into individual subscribers (although they will put some as most publishers charge money for every complaint.)
Sadly, I don’t think any of the publishers realize just how little most delivery people care to put any effort in due to the terrible pay. I expect that since its become harder and harder to find carriers and few last longer than 5 months delivery problems like Patterico’s are going to get worse.
Mark (7b635e) — 2/23/2006 @ 2:28 pmCancel ’em. I did years ago, and I don’t miss ’em a bit. Let’s see if we can make the LA Times the first big city daily with a monopoly to go belly up.
trentk269 (3d3bfe) — 2/23/2006 @ 3:07 pmI’ve never had a subscription to a newspaper in my life. The Internet is great – now I don’t have to read over other people’s shoulders.
Amphipolis (346a88) — 2/23/2006 @ 3:22 pmCould it be that the LA Times knows the address of your new diggs and is intentionally delaying your receipt of their lousy paper so your corrections of same aren’t published as timely?
Ben Pugh (1527b3) — 2/23/2006 @ 4:54 pmNOW YOUR BRAGGIN
mark (a90377) — 2/23/2006 @ 7:12 pmThe Daily News delivers to a wide area now, but don’t know if Palos Verdes is part of it.
On the other hand, every other paper (including the Daily News) is just AP News wrapped around advertisements, so you’d better find something else to do in the morning…
Kevin Murphy (6a7945) — 2/23/2006 @ 10:21 pmI almost canceled my subscription to my local paper due to similar problems and also held back because my wife likes to read it.
It caused me to think a lot about what I get out of the paper. Nowadays what the paper gives me is a crossword puzzle and sports coverage. I get almost all news over the net and I’ve long ago given up on reading liberal screeds on the editorial page. The wife likes the Today Section (what used to be called the women’s section) and there’s a weekly food section that is marginally interesting if you like to cook as we do. We also cruise the ad inserts and whatnot.
We still take it, but I’m tempted to cancel it about once a month or so.
Dwilkers (a1687a) — 2/24/2006 @ 4:13 amDwilkers – you mean you don’t read the funnies? It’s the only essential part of the paper…but then, there’s Comictastic…
Harmon (b9d9a1) — 2/24/2006 @ 7:25 pmPatterico,
You read the LA Times so we don’t have to. Please don’t cancel.:)
Kevin
Kevin (272a6e) — 2/25/2006 @ 12:16 pm