Should The Indy Go Daily?
Is the time ripe for a big change at The Independent? Maybe a Barney/Nick dueling columns for the next month or so to test a daily out and see what happens? Should they take on the erstwhile News-Pressians and make a go of it?
I see just a few pages at first in the Indy racks sometime next week -- people must have an alternative! Will it happen? or will the Indy continue on their as-many-classified-and-real-estate-ads-we-can-get present course? Yes, they bring profit -- but do they make a difference?
Will the plot thicken? Cherchez la femme!
I see just a few pages at first in the Indy racks sometime next week -- people must have an alternative! Will it happen? or will the Indy continue on their as-many-classified-and-real-estate-ads-we-can-get present course? Yes, they bring profit -- but do they make a difference?
Will the plot thicken? Cherchez la femme!
posted by Sara De la Guerra | 7/07/2006 11:53:00 PM
Our Community Guidelines ask that you use the Blogger/Open ID login or the
more private Name/URL option when making comments. Comments using "Anonymous" will not be published. For more info, see choosing an identity.
29 Comments:
The Indy does not have the chops nor wisdom to recognize this opportunity that just walked in their door. I hope they prove me wrong, but no business vision there. Nick Welsh cannot do it all and has no authority about those business decisions.
The Gray Lady of the West is down. The Independent should kick her in the teeth, smash a bottle over her head, and steal her best reporters, advertisers, market share, and reputation.
And then I woke up.
Indy daily? Yes, it should. Although there is an alternative daily, the SB Sound, which reportedly will expand on Monday, it is not really much of anything. (Admittedly, though, I rarely see it because of its limited distribution and rehash quality --- and its online version is not available for the large number of the SB computer users who use Macs.)
Santa Barbara without a NEWS that one can rely upon as being NEWS newspaper is unthinkable! The Indy despite having fallen on thin days of being but an entertainment ad weekly, with a brave Nick Welsh holding on, has a good base - and with disaffected NP staffers and Barney, it could be great.
What about the new Daily Sound?
The Indy is more biased than the Newspress. Read the "News" section and see how slanted it is. I'm not a big Secord fan, but that "Secord Attacks" article was so pro-Wolf.
get real...a daily newspaper is a waste of resources..you don't need it (altho you think you do)... blogs are better, quicker and afterwards you don't have to recycle anything and can go on a bike ride! Wendy..thanks for the entertainment, girl, but we don't need you!
8:29: is that a new spin from the Dan camp? to preface your pro-Secord comments with "I'm not a big Secord fan, but...."
Attacks are attacks; that's what Dan's been doing. Love it or leave it but it is the news and it is the truth. He (or his advisers) must have foolishly thought he could gain some ground by being an attack dog right out of the primary. doesn't work. hasn't worked. so change tactics and move on, or stop whining
FDS: can you please lose the "smash...steal...kick her in the teeth"...allusions.......
Well, shoudn't we all encourage advertisers with whom we do business not to advertise in the News-Press anymore? The bid'ness end is the end to hit...
The Santa Maria Times is not so bad... kind of a small-town, just the facts ma'am attitude. They do let Andy Caldwell rant and rave, but that gets them North County readers. I'd be happy to see them expand down there... I started reading them pretty regularly 10 or so years ago when I cancelled my News-Press subscription over their ridiculousness... only read the News-Press at the Library, where the Santa Maria Times is also available, and not bad.
The best thing about the Santa Maria Times is it might be able to be less of a lapdog to the wealthy, which even the Independent has trouble with... the Independent once referred to $1 million dollar homes in Storke Ranch as `working class housing'... and not ironically.
(don't spell Storke Stork! Unless you're a blond!)
Maybe the Indy could have daily content (or more frequent) content online. Perhaps the paper edition could have a password in it that persisted for one week, after which time material became free... so that there would still be incentive to pick of the weekly paper rag.
The Santa Maria Times could also expand... it has sort of a no-frills, `just the facts ma'am' kind of feel. I started reading it at the downtown Library when I cancelled my Newsuppress subscription years and years ago. The Times does bow to North Countyites with opinion space, but otherwise their own opinions are kind of dowdy small town stuff... which would be a breath of fresh air for the South Coast, where even the Indy has become a lapdog of the glitterati.
And to think that in earlier times the Indy's predecessor was nearly Maoist, with equal compensation for all employees, from the toilet cleaner to the publisher...
Perhaps the Indy could put more frequent updates online... daily or near daily. The weekly paper could have a password hidden in it to unlock the subsequent week's news; after one week, all news would become free online. That way they might boost the circulation of the weekly paper rag.
I'd be happy too of the Santa Maria Times expanded to the South Coast... I read the Times at the Library, because I cancelled my Newsuppress subscription years ago, and now I read it free at the Library. The rack also has the Santa Maria Times. The Times is kind of dowdy, small towny, but I think that is a good contrast to South Coast publishing, where all the newspapers are lapdogs of the gliterati.
And to think that the Indy was once Maoist, with equal salaries for everyone from toilet cleaner to publisher. How far we have devolved!
I agree that the Indy is very biased--but I think that that is its market share.
People know that he Indy is a far left publication, and those Pinto's of the world who are devoted to the cause will continue to support it if it goes daily, my only concern from a business standpoint is that there isn't enough money in that market to support more then a weekly.
I would like to see the Sound move it up a notch, but in terms of impressions websites are key; and being one of those mac users I can say their site is terrible terrible terrible.
In response to annon:
"Although there is an alternative daily, the SB Sound, which reportedly will expand on Monday, it is not really much of anything. (Admittedly, though, I rarely see it because of its limited distribution and rehash quality --- and its online version is not available for the large number of the SB computer users who use Macs.)"
I think you should give this thing a chance. I started picking it up about two months ago and it's pretty good. I mean if you can get past the typos and such. With community support they'll do fine.
Granted I'm not a Mac user, but I love the Sound's website. I think it's genius. Wish i'd of thought of it.
Good grief snugspout - 3 posts and they all sound alike?
Anyway, the SM Times has very little news but if it picked up the void left by NP it would be a good thing. It is also free online! The opinion page isn't conservative either but I think they balance it by the Andy Caldwell stuff. Not sure if the Times is really interested in becoming a bigger player in the county though. dd
8:29: is that a new spin from the Dan camp? to preface your pro-Secord comments with "I'm not a big Secord fan, but...."
Attacks are attacks; that's what Dan's been doing. Love it or leave it but it is the news and it is the truth. He (or his advisers) must have foolishly thought he could gain some ground by being an attack dog right out of the primary. doesn't work. hasn't worked. so change tactics and move on, or stop whining
I'm actually a Guzzardi fan. I was making a point that the Indy has an article that exhibits biases towards Wolf, which it does. Just wanted to point out that if the Newspress exhibits biases, and blends editorials with reporting, then the Indy is far worse.
Maybe you should turn down your attack-dogging a little bit and listen, you whiny, tactics-changy, pro-Wolf attack dog. RRarrrr, sneer!
How strange that nobody complains that Nasty Nick is executive editor and the opinion voice of the Independent. The hypocrisy is amazing. No seperation between news and opinion here and it clearly is relfected in the "news" coverage.
Gag me with a spoon!
I used to be an Independent fan, and I appreciated the writing style of Nixie Welsh...but then...I got involved in local land-use issues, and discovered what a FARCE our "plastic Rose" is...how deep in the pockets of developers our politicians live. I started paying closer attention to the articles in the Indy...and to my horror, I learned that the development industry has duped the lefty/enviros/progressives...whatever they like to be called...(a plastic rose by any other name is still as phony)...the problem is so many self-proclaimed progressives don't know they've been duped!!! It's OK, guys and gals -- we can form a support group and get through it together....BUT....daily Indy?....no way, that's more developer propaganda...if you don't believe it, take the following test to see if you've be duped:
1. Which choice is better? (pick one)
A) put high-density condos along the Gaviota coast and save Goleta Valley
B) put high-density condos in Goleta Valley and save the Gaviota coast
C) neither
2. True or False? Increasing housing reduces traffic.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Evaluation:
1. Any answer besides (C) means you've likely been duped by the development industry.
2. If you answered "True", then you've definitely been duped!
Rx for being dev-duped: Take a walk on the beach and clear your mind. Take a dose of common sense and call a friend who lives in LA in the morning.
OH you poor girl.........."high density condos"? "plastic rose"??? you have no idea, "leftist goleta valley girl".....[isn't that a double oxymoron or something?].....sounds like Davies perceptioneering at work again.....
Anon 6:08 ... umm, if you haven't realized, the Indy isn't a newspaper. It's, what I like to call, for entertainment purposes only. If you read the Indy for news, you're a week behind the rest of us.
For a while, I thought that maybe a demo in support of Jerry Roberts & Co. might be the way to go, but it didn't seem to interest enough people . . .
Instead, about the only way to express support for those who quit on a deeply-held journalistic principle is the old, and never-very-effective tactic of boycott . . .
Not only cancelling subscriptions (which many of us are probably not prepared to do, wanting to stay abreast of developments), but, just as effective, boycotting major advertisers . . .or urging local advertisers to pull their support.
An alternative, of course, would be for the advertisers to throw their support to the new daily, which is reportedly going to appear bigger and better on Monday anyway . . .
National advertisers probably won't change. They're locked into contracts through agencies . . .unless major local outlets pressure the nationals. . .
But local merchants can have a hell of an effect.
And don't forget the classifieds. They are a major source of newspaper revenue.
LGVG has a few good points... but I still don't agree with her. I don't think the County Planning Staff is owned by developers... they are stubborn and ignorant in a way that is independent of developers' interests. I think the Indy has historically overrepresented County Planners' viewpoints.
Unfortunately, nearly all urbanization and European-style farming on the South Coast is unsustainable. South Coast population actually *declined* from Chumash times to 1850... from 15,000 or so to 4,000. The farming boom of the Goleta Valley of the late 1800's was made possible only by irrigation, and the Euro-farming destroyed the Goleta Slough, which was an incredible ecosystem that supported way more local population than the Euro-farming ever has. All post-1950 urbanization in the Goleta Valley is totally dependent on Cachuma, and then the 1990's burst of development upon the state water.
When people who already own houses argue that there are limited resources for new housing, they overlook the fact that the resources that support their own homes are completely man-made. More man-made resources could be made available for new housing in just the same way that man-made resources were developed for old housing.
What would impress me would be if Joe Guzzardi stood up and said: `I am so committed to improving the the South Coast environment that I will raze my own home and make an endowment to remediate my land to its natural state prior to European contact and to maintain it in that condition for perpetuity.' But he doesn't... he and Gary Earle and Judith Ishkanian are have a goal that is totally identical to developers: self-enrichment. The only difference is how they go about it.
Does housing cause traffic? No way. Houses don't drive cars. It is the people who live in the houses who drive the cars and make traffic. And that brings up another hypocrisy of the anti-development crowd... they drive just as frequently as the people who would live in new housing. At the Goleta Valley Community Center housing forums, I watched anti-development people rant and rave about traffic, and then get into big SUVs alone and drive home.
I wish there were a way to allow high density housing, but slap a big driving tax on the occupants... that is, tax at somthing like $0.50/mile on the odometers of their cars. Actually, I'd like an odometer tax on everybody! Modern cellphone technology could take care of the reporting.
Why is high density housing good? Leaves more open space. Actually, why not raze all the low-density housing and put everyone into high density housing, then remediate all the land freed up to pre-European contact conditions. Well, that is hardly practical (unless Mao, Stalin, and Robert Mugabe take over California), but is is something think hard about. High density neighborhoods are way more livable... downtown SB is much more interesting to live in than the Goleta Valley is.
In reference to snugspout--
No doubt that the only constant is change. You site how farming has affected the natural landscape, and that sensible-growth advocates have their own self-interests, drive cars, etc. Yes, of course. We all leave an impact. It is important that we all acknowledge that and see that similarity in each other. To me, this struggle is not about who lives the most perfect example, but about all of us who live in this region making wise decisions for the future of the land and the overall quality of living here.
I do not wish to shut anybody out, but I am realistic enough to realize that every physical space has limitations. The buildout number is defined by us. At one extreme, we can raze everyone's homes and build high-rises of very small apartments, thereby housing hundreds of thousands on the South Coast. At another extreme, we raze everybody's home and preserve a huge percentage of the land, selling large parcels to a few of the mega-rich. Obviously, we will collectively choose something in between these two extremes. But no matter how you slice it, there is a limit. So the arguments against "people who already own homes" is a distraction from the real issue.
I believe we will be most satisfied to view ourselves as having the privilege and responsibility of taking care of this coastline we call home. Limiting growth will keep it from meeting the same crowded, polluted destiny that other southern California towns have.
I am bewildered that more people are not understanding the importance of minimizing growth and catering to the natural beauty of this land. Recently, I spoke with Joe Guzzardi and he shares that same sentiment. Why are the people who love this place not standing together to see that it maintains it's quality?
I hope that someday you'll join us...
Check out this week's top story in the Indy. It is an advertisement for KTYD! The News Press is still better than that.
And, what about Edhat? It's daily, objective, well-written.
You are right. Edhat.com is the same as the weekly newspaper, Santa Barbara Independent. What was I thinking?!
Or, maybe the Independent has a lot of stories about arts and culture, in additon to news, which scoops all the other news media repeatedly. I think the Angry Poodle wrote something about the Newspress editors last week. Something happened, I heard and read.
Besides, not too many people making noise about returning their subscriptions they pay for the Indy.
Well, Guzzardi, Ishkanian, and Earle live incredibly consumptive lifestyles that destroy the South Coast environment. Why should anyone support that lifestyle? The distraction is to focus all the attention on new housing alone, and no attention on the behavior of the people who live here and soil this place already. The foundation of the no-growthers is a big lie... that *they* don't soil our South Coast, but the *new people* will.
If *everyone* (existing residents and new residents) lived in a much less consumptive manner, then we could have our cake and eat it too... more housing and a terrific environment.
Why in heaven's name ever preserve the agricultural heritage of the Goleta Valley? Euro-agricultural destroyed the Goleta Slough, the most incredible environmental asset the South Coast ever had. Flocks of migratory birds were so large and dense they darkened the sky at noon. One housand Chumash thrived on the shellfish and other sea life.
Am I saying the enviroment of the Goleta Valley would be better with housing instead of ag? Maybe, depends on the landscaping of the housing (if the pollution from fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides is reduced) and on the propensity of the residents to get out of their cars and bike, use public transport, and carpool. That the County Planners were so inept and controlling not to present a winning case actually helped the hypocritical, consumptive no-growthers.... Guzzardi et al should thank Lisa Plowman and Susan Rose for being so feckless.
I'm no developer and I have no relationship to any developer. But right is right and wrong is wrong, and the hypocrisy and environmental destruction of the no-growthers must be pointed out.
snugspout--
So sad that you find the need to trash on others' lifestyles when you don't even know them personally. I wonder what your lifestyle is that makes you so certain that you are better than people you don't even know. Since you are so sure of your superiority, is it safe to assume that you never ride in a car, use plastic wrap or flush a toilet?
The only thing that I can gather about your lifestyle--from your posts--is that you do not own a home in the Santa Barbara area and are jealous of those who do.
Actually, I own a home here, and I do my best to ride my bike to work and keep my driving below 9000 miles a year. I certainly could do better at driving less, however.
Not all criticism comes from jealousy, GVG; you are merely counterattacking to evade addressing the hypocrisy of the no-growthers. Facts are facts, and not only do I know that those leaders of the no-growth movement consume more than they could, I know the census data on driving in the Eastern Goleta Valley... some of the lowest uses of carpooling and public transit I've ever seen. The nerve of the same people to complain about traffic impacts of new housing is immense.
Similar to their nerve in claiming that developers seeking to profit are behind everything... when the no-growthers seek similarly to profit from increased value in their own homes. The no-growthers and the developers are just mirror images of one another.
Ok snugspout--
So, now you've cleared things up. You own a home here, but consider yourself better than slow-growth activists because you have are in a position that allows you to ride a bike to work. Ok, then. Got it.
Back to my orignal point:
I believe we will be most satisfied to view ourselves as having the privilege and responsibility of taking care of this coastline we call home. Limiting growth will keep it from meeting the same crowded, polluted destiny that other southern California towns have.
I am bewildered that more people are not understanding the importance of minimizing growth and catering to the natural beauty of this land.
I don't consider myself better than anyone. You are fixated on one particular solution to keeping our area wonderful, but you ignore far better solutions, like: *everyone* use their car less; *everyone* live on less land; get rid of the euro-farming that destroyed our wetlands; tax the enormous windfall that homeowners (including myself) have gotten from the overconstriction of new housing and use that money for public transport and more good bikepaths.
If anyone thinks they are better, it is the no-growthers, who have been incredibly hostile to new people. Judith Ishkanian on the radio with Travis Armstrong or Travis Kaminsky or Travis X or whatever characterized new housing as ghettos, and Gary Earle at a Goleta Community meeting said new housing would be crime-ridden... I heard him myself. BTW, I have never bought in to the phoney racism charge against COSP and HDF... those organizations dislike all non-homewoners equally, and don't discriminate in their antipathy based on race.
Of course you and the no-growthers want to make the discussion as low and mean as you can, which makes it harder to find true, innovative solutions. The gutter game produces stasis, which is what you want. Much better if you would just stop contributing to global warming, the Mideast crisis, and local traffic congestion by riding your bicycle, carpooling, and taking the bus. But horrors! If you did that traffic congestion would go down, and you'd have to admit we could build new homes!
Post a Comment
<< Home