Thursday, October 15, 2009

NYT's Bay Area section starts tomorrow

The New York Times, which has a daily circulation of 49,000 in the Bay Area (65,000 on Sundays), will launch its Bay Area section tomorrow (Oct. 16), with coverage of "Arts & culture, style & dining, politics & public affairs, San Francisco & Silicon Valley," according to an e-mail to subscribers. The section will appear Fridays and Sundays.

Columnists in the new section include Daniel Weintraub, a longtime Sacramento Bee political columnist, and Scott James, a novelist and founder of the the SoMa Literary Review in San Francisco.

The Times' "Media Decoder" blog reported this morning:
    At first, most of the editing and reporting will be done by Times staff journalists, but the plan calls for turning the bulk of that work over to a local operation after a few months. A nonprofit consortium that includes KQED, a public radio station in San Francisco and the University of California, Berkeley’s, graduate school of journalism, has been in talks with The Times about taking over the added work.
The consortium is being organized by Wells Fargo heir F. Warren Hellman, who has promised to donate $5 million and said he may ask the city of San Francisco to help fund the journalism effort.

The Times is looking to add local pages in other markets, the next being Chicago, according to a Sept. 4 Times story.

The Wall Street Journal, which has toppled USA Today as the nation's No. 1 circulation daily, is planning a San Francisco edition that will probably launch in November or December, but it looks as if the Times will be first.

The Times' e-mail told subscribers they can meet two of the paper's editors (they didn't identify them) at a special Times-sponsored panel discussion following the screening of “The Most Dangerous Man in America: Daniel Ellsberg and the Pentagon Papers” at the Mill Valley Film Festival on Oct. 17-18.


Anonymous said...

A few years ago, I might have said "wow" the NYtimes is coming to town, but they don't have much credibility in my eyes. My opinion changed when the details of the Jayson Blair scandal came out, about how their editors repeatedly ignored obvious ethical violations. There was Judith Miller, who falsely reported about the existence of WMD in Iraq. And how about that story last year about McCain's affair with a lobbyist that the Times had to completely retract after it was sued. So my opinion of the Times is a lot lower than it once was. It's not the vaunted journalistic institution everyone claims it is.

Anonymous said...

The New York Times is the best newspaper in the United States, hands-down. But it's premier Bay Area edition was a yawn: two pages, four stories, all of them old news to locals, like Oakland has a high crime rate. What's the point?

Anonymous said...

I wasn't impressed by the Times Bay Area Section either. I wonder how long this will continue? I recall the Wall Street Journal used to have a California section, but I think it disappeared years ago.