The Grey Lady Shrinks

Posted by Eric Kenning on August 14, 2007

The New York Times, which raised its price by 25 percent in July, from one dollar to $1.25, narrowed its perspective by 12 percent on August 6, when it cut the width of the paper by an inch and a half to 12 inches, according to a brief, apparently truncated story that ended in the middle of a sentence in the NwYrk Times, as the paper now calls itself. The Times also revealed that it would be changing its venerable masthead slogan as well, from “All the News That’s Fit to Print” to “All the News That Fits We’ll Print.”

“At a time of rising costs and vanishing advertisers and plummeting readership and expanding waistlines, we had to do someth,” said publisher Arthur (““Pinched”) Sulzb, formerly known as Arthur (“Pinch“) Sulzberger Jr. Sulzb, who claims to have drastically cut his own width as well, shedding 20 pounds of fat, mostly from his head, added, “Admittedly, when it comes time for the Times to funnel fake intelligence provided by anonymous government officials in order to start unnecessary wars in the Middle East, we may have less space to do it in,” referring to the fabricated WMD-in-Iraq stories by his close friend Judith Miller that ran prominently on the front page in 2002-03. “But,” he continued, “from now on we’’re only going to be buying little subcompact wars, which should fit our new format nicely.” Sulzb also said that if the Bush administration starts a war with Iran without the paper’s help, the Times would not have any room to oppose it, but it was prepared to cover both the war and the subsequent worldwide economic meltdown and total political chaos in the Sunday “Styles” section.

In a related move, the Times published a lead editorial calling upon world leaders to agree on a global plan for reducing the amount of bad weather, riots, insurgencies, epidemics, elections, summit meetings, trends, forecasts, stock market plunges and rallies, and alarming new studies about the irreversibly harmful effects of ordinary foods and beverages by 60 percent by the year 2009. It also called for comparable reductions in the number of tediously similar exciting new upcoming neighborhoods and upscale restaurants and Broadway shows, and strict quotas on the number of boring yet newsworthy new fashion designers, artists, dancers, filmmakers, and rich people who have transformed old abandoned canning factories into cute country homes. That would make it possible, the editorial pointed out, for the Times to reduce its width even more, to about five inches, and to switch to thinner, softer paper, so that the daily edition of the paper could then be sold in handy, fluffy rolls around a cardboard cylinder, which would allow it to serve another household purpose aside from providing questionable news, and the price could be increased accordingly. 

Comments

Finally someone with a plan for a use for the New York Times.  I personally have always wondered what possible use it could be to anyone.

Yes, Mr. Kenning, please send me C.O.D. a twelve pack of those Sulzb rolls—I can just imagine how rewarding taking a crap will be.

I would be curious as to what responders think the cause is for NYT’s decline

a. a changing political climate? (good)

b. increasing functional illiteracy with respects to the Time’s style? (bad)

c. a general shift from a print to a picture mediated culture? (bad)

d. increased use of the Internet for news? (good)

e. all of the above?

f. none of the above?

Also: to what English language paper do we tern to for an encyclopedia view of the news?  Or do we all have to learn German and read the Frankfurter Allgemeine?

Mr Cundriff:
Correct answer: Who really needs the ‘news’?

Mr. Meng, your plan on paper makes sense but in practice will produce a disappointing result:  Contemporary toilets reject liberal crap.  I hope this exigent warning reaches you before experiencing the backwater of liberal bilge.  We all wish you well.

Well, RobertB, there’s some truth in what you say.  Still, had on 29 June 1914 more readers of the Times turned to Section Z, page 569, left side inside column below the fold bottom (to use contemporary language), and had read the one paragraph report out of Sarajevo, they would have been WAY ahead of the curve. Had more Gringos read an equally remote and small notice in the Times printed before 22 April 1915 and posted by the German embassy, maybe the Lusitania would have had a few less passengers, and Wilson’s War would have been avoided.  Just speculation, of course. It’s also speculation that The New York Times Light doesn’t have such articles.

I hope that the new NYTMS continues to publish its
obituaries, this most useful service for those looking
for available apartments.

All the news editors in all the world are just little old ladies gossiping over their tea.
--Henry David Thoreau

Posted by Danby on Aug 14, 2007.
Click to flag this comment as abusive

Some wags in Australia once decided to produce toilet rolls with Malcolm Fraser’s face printed on the paper. Fraser was nearing the end of a long Prime Minister-ship and not popular.

I reckon they should put that Frankenstein monster, Rudy Giulianni’s boat race on the NYT lavatory paper.

I like it a lot! Very useful. Many thanks. All the best!

This will be my first time visiting, Thanks!

Post a Comment

By submitting this form, you give Taki's Magazine permission to publish this comment. Comments will be published at our discretion, and may be edited for clarity and length. Personal attacks, ethnic slurs, the riding of hobby horses and the beating of dead ones will be deleted as soon as they are detected by our small but alert staff. Repeat abusers of this policy will be barred from leaving comments. All comments reflect only the views of those posting them and not necessarily those of this website, its editors, or authors. For best formatting, please limit your response to one paragraph and don't hit "enter" to force line breaks.

Commenting is not available in this section entry.