Marquel, TPVs NYTimes All The News That We Print We Print And Other Meaningless Aphorisms Section correspondent, was snoring slightly when he woke up to read New York Times Plans Cutbacks in Newsroom Staff. The paper, saying it needed to reduce costs to safeguard profitability, said it would cut about 100 news jobs and a smaller number in other operations. Three years ago they dropped a hundred journalists, and again the next year, another one hundred. Last year they fired thirty more. Marquel thought the Times was pretty savvy. They figured, rightly, that since they rarely report real news, they don’t need any real reporters. The four year experiment seems to have proven them right. It turns out they don’t need reporters at all. Marquel went to the Times building for the second time in three days to see what the Times was planning.
“We’ve found that reporters are an unnecessary cost in the internet age. Everybody knows what’s happening.” An editor told me.
“But the Times is the paper of record. If it doesn’t appear in the Times, it didn’t happen.” I objected.
“The opposite is true too, of course.” He said.
“What do you mean?” I asked.
“I mean if it does appear in the Times, it may not have happened.” He asserted.
“I can’t think of an event.” I said.
“Oh they’re legion. Look at the Gulf of Tonkin. Started the Vietnam War. We reported it. Didn’t happen. Look at the WMDs in Iraq. We reported them. Didn’t exist.”
” You’re right,” I remarked, “being the paper of record means nothing.”
“No, it means we can charge bigger advertising rates. So that’s good. But obviously reporters just collect rumors and information fed to them. We can make up stories without reporters. Just like you.” He said smiling.
“But here I am reporting.” I said.
“You and I know that’s not true. You’re making all this up. You’re not even interviewing me. You’re writing this on the F train. We can do that too.” He said.
“So what are you planning to do with no reporters?” I asked.
“Some of the news we can just fabricate. We’ve been doing that for years, and doing a good job of it.” He said. “Look at the governor’s primary. If you read the Times you’d think he ran unopposed. Did you know about Teachout? She really existed! We didn’t really think so.” He asserted.
“That’s true. We ran a debate at least.” I said.
“Yes that was a smart move. Next time candidates refuse to debate we plan on doing the same thing. Just make up a debate.”
“So no more political reporters,” I bemoaned.
“I didn’t say that. We’re keeping a hefty political staff. It’s one of our largest moneymakers.” He said.
“It’s profitable?” I asked.
“Oh sure. Endorsements are our single greatest source of income.” He said.
“So what else besides your political staff are you keeping?” I asked.
“In the order of profitability, we’re keeping our restaurant reviews. A good three star review of a very successful restaurant pays for our costs for a month.” He said.
“Hmm,” I said, “maybe we should have a restaurant reviewer.” I said.
“It’s a fabulous source of income. Movie reviews, too, but we don’t need reviewers. Just somebody from the political or restaurant staff to do a movie or two.” He said.
“But doesn’t he have to watch the movie?” I asked.
“We haven’t done that for years. We get the info from the studio and we tell them the rates. ” He said.
“So you’re getting rid of basically all your reporters except for a few in house writers and editors who will simply act as shills.” I said.
“Yes. We figure profits which haven’t been bad will go through the roof. We’ll have no travel expenses, no incomes to pay. Basically we’ll be like a bank, receiving money but spending almost nothing.” He said.
Where will you get your stories from?” I asked.
“From the PotholeView and similar outfits. Your piece on the California sex legislation could have been front page. And we don’t have to pay you a thing.” He said.
“You could pay me if you wanted,” I suggested.
“I’m sorry. We don’t want to pay anybody anything. It’s the completion of the Sulzberger legend. From all the news that’s fit to print to all the money that’s possible to make. We’re in the moneymaking business.” He said.
“You always were,” I remarked.
“Yes but we wasted a lot of it on news.” He said.
“And non news,”I pointed out. He looked at me and winked. I wasn’t sad. The Times wasn’t disappearing. It was simply reborn. I walked home thinking of the stories I might read in the future. Real stories, not news.
***
BY MARQUEL: The New Times News: Stories
On the F train? What station do you get on? We’re in Brooklyn
No, don’t tell me you make-up everything.
Ay Ay Ay. The Times should release music. and popcorn
The are right. Who needs reporters?! All they need is ads.
I am just sighing.
I don’t find it too funny. Neither the topic, nor your article.
So don’t pay him
move on
why are you so rude?
We don’t find you funny either
love…the song says love
Thank you Marjorie.
You’re the only one not laughing at me.
Thank you. And bless you.
Typo? :
Movie reviews, too, but we don’t need reviews [don’t need reviewers]?
This was nice:
Endorsements are our single greatest source of income.