Home > Uncategorized > New Times R.I.P.

New Times R.I.P.

So here’s another update about New Times that Bob Rucker can get pissed off about.

I’ve been telling you about a seismic shift in New Times philosophy, away from the glory days of Steve Moss and Tom Fulks to this new feel-good, warm-and-fuzzy Ryan Miller approach.

This is being confirmed by an unlikely source — New Times advertising staff! Yep, apparently they’re going around town with their new mantra, telling prospective advertisers, “We don’t do investigative reporting anymore. We only do ‘event coverage.'”

Event coverage? This is what I’m hearing from business owners.

So rest easy, Wade McKinney. Sleep tight, Tom O’Malley. Don’t give it a second thought, Dave Romero. Do whatever you want, Jerry Lenthall. New Times no longer cares (unless you have an event to promote. Well, THEN . . . . .).

Just remember that we’re talking about the paper of Steve Moss. And Tom Fulks. And Rick Jackoway. And Coleen Bondy. And Sarah Christie. And Anne McMahon. And Jeff McMahon. And Steve Jones. And Dan Blackburn. And King Harris. And Abraham Hyatt. And, yes, Karen Velie. Reporters who busted their ass to give us the rest of the story that the Tribune couldn’t or wouldn’t bother with.

Steve Moss always backed his reporters. Ryan Miller? He skipped out early on a radio interview on KVEC while one of his reporters was sitting there being reamed unfairly by local public officials. Steve would have put those jokers in their place. Ryan? Hemming and hawing and looking at his watch.

Those halycon days are gone, my friends. But, hey, we’ve got that great cover story this week, comparing “The Nativity Story” to “Passion of the Christ.”

Meanwhile, over in San Luis cemetery, Steve Moss is definitely rolling over in his grave and puking up all over the place.

Advertisements
  1. Peter Farwell
    December 22, 2006 at 10:30 am

    Dave,

    I took the bait. After reading your blog postings about New Times, I went on lone and read the cover story about the two religious movies.

    Here’s my general reaction: The reporter is obviously a Christian or someone of deep religious faith; his tone is almost reverential towards the Gibson movie. Is that bad? I dunno, but is is obvious.

    In terms of the article itself, I guess I’d say, “So what?” The guy seems to be comparing apples and oranges. Is he expecting every religious movie to have the impact of “Passion?” And wasn’t the success of “Passion” at least based on the controversy surrounding the movie? So why would this reporter assume that “Nativity” would generare the same interest.

    Besides, as a devout athiest, the larger question is,
    Who gives a shit?

    I guess I’ll have to go back to the Tribune to get my news now.

  2. JerryDinAZ
    December 22, 2006 at 3:38 pm

    WHO GIVES A SHIT?? WELL LET’S LOOK AT THAT QUESTION…
    87% OF AMERICA IS CHRISTIAN, I GUESS THEY CARE! ADVERTISERS DON’T WANT TO BE A PART OF THE LIBERAL LEFTY SECULAR PROGRESSIVE WE HATE EVERYTHING RANTS…SO I GUESS THEY CARE!

    NOW LET’S LOOK AT WHO DOESN’T CARE. THE LEFTY SECULAR PROGRESSIVES NEVER PUT THEIR MONEY WHERE THEIR MOUTHS ARE…SO THEY DON’T CARE! THE ADVERTISERS DON’T CARE ABOUT THE LIBERAL DREGS THEIR DOLLARS ARE BRINGING IN. THEY WANT THE 87% SHOPPING IN THEIR STORES!

    PUT UP OR SHUT UP SLO LIBERALS! IF YOU WANT A RAG TO SPEW YOUR HATE THEN SUPPORT IT FINANCIALLY! OR I GUESS YOU COULD GO THE GOVERNMENT YOU HATE SO MUCH FOR A PIECE OF THE SACRIFICIAL TAX COW LIKE NPR AND THEIR DYING NETWORK.

    BOTTOM LINE, HATE DOESN’T SELL ANYTHING. FOLKS DON’T REALLY CARE ABOUT SLO COUNTY AS LONG AS THEY ARE THERE BEFORE THE BIG WALLS GET FINISHED BY THE ENVIRONAZI-GOOD OL’ BOY LOCAL MILLIONAIRES!

    YOU WANT TO SELL? THEN GIVE FOLKS THE REAL TRUTH ABOUT SOCIETY AND POLITICS LIKE HANNITY, ORIELLY, FOX NEWS, AND THE EL RUSHBO! SEEMS LIKE EVERYTHING YOUR “SP’s” ARE ATTEMPTING IS FAILING. YOU’D THINK BY NOW YOU’D BE GETTING A CLUE.

    SO ONWARD CHRISTIAN SOLDIERS! WE ARE TAKING BACK AMERICA ONE LIBERAL RAG AT A TIME…ONE MOVIE AT A TIME…AND GUESS WHAT’S NEXT?? WE ARE GOING TO TAKE BACK OUR SCHOOLS AND COLLEGES! LOOK OUT YOU MULLET HEADED LIBERAL LEZBO/WACK-A-LOONS! YOU’RE NEXT, AND THERE ISN’T A DAMN THING YOU CAN DO ABOUT IT.

    THE SECULAR PROGRESSIVE STARTED THIS WAR…WE, THE “CULTURE WARRIORS” ARE NOW GOING TO FINISH IT!

    I PROPOSE A NEW NAME FOR THE PAPER…”GOOD NEWS TIMES” NOW THAT WILL SELL!

    WHAT SAY YOU?

  3. JerryDinAZ
    December 22, 2006 at 3:52 pm

    SPEAKING OF CHRISTIANS…CHECK THIS OUT! WE WON’T LET THIS HAPPEN IN AMERICA!

    Christian Beaten for “Polluting”
    a Public Drinking Glass

    Nasir Ashraf, a Christian stone mason, was brutally attacked by radical Muslims just outside Lahore.
    While working on the construction of a room at a school near Manga Mandi in Pakistan, Nasir took a break after becoming thirsty. He drew water and drank from a glass chained to a cemented public water tank next to a mosque, which was reserved for “all” poor people. Returning to the construction site, a Muslim man asked him, “Why did you drink water from this glass since you are a Christian?” The man accused Nasir of polluting the glass. The Muslim man yanked the glass off the iron chain, broke it and threw it in a garbage can. The man summoned other radical Muslims to the scene, furiously saying, “This Christian polluted our glass.” Hearing this, the incensed mob began beating Nasir, yelling that a Christian dog drank water from their glass.
    The radical Muslims encouraged bystanders to beat Nasir because it would be a “good” deed that would benefit them in heaven

  4. Atascadero Chuck
    December 22, 2006 at 6:12 pm

    There goes Jerry, trying to yank us off topic again.

    I’ll wait and give NT the benefit of the doubt for the next few issues before making a final decision. To be honest, I haven’t read it much lately. The few times I do, there doesn’t seem to be much news.

    I tend to have a more spiritual base than you do, Dave, so I’m not bothered automatically by religion creeping into a newspaper. But I agree with you that New Times was/is the paper that we dependend on for stuff the Trib wouldn’t/couldn’t print (like that Freitas story).

    I guess my question is whether or not the New Times decision is reflective of what other media are doing around the country.i.e. shying away from controversy in order to protect their financial butts.

    Which means we need Hometown Radio more than ever!

  5. Santa Maria Jerry
    December 22, 2006 at 7:24 pm

    If New Times goes belly up will all the gays and lesbians who work there go on unemployment?

  6. Anonymous
    December 22, 2006 at 7:32 pm

    I’d sure hate to New Times stop being the alternative voice in town, but what am I supposed to read instead? Plus Magazine? SLO Journal???? Rogue Voice? Or that SLO News thing.

    I guess they all have a niche to fill, but the only other publication that comes close to New times is Hopedance, but they do more national than local stuff.

    It would be great to see Hopedance step up and do more investigative stuff within the county.

    By the way, the Shredder is boring. So boring. : (

  7. Anonymous
    December 22, 2006 at 7:38 pm

    If Dave Congleton tried to take the helm at the New Times he’d be crying in a corner somewhere, rocking back and forth.
    Dave, I’m really sorry that you like to think you are a journalist, but you are just a guy with a microphone. You do not, and probably never will, understand how journalism works.
    You know what makes me smile most out of all of this though, is that an alternative paper doesn’t need to be left or right, it needs to be good–which New Times is–and because it is stirring up emotion, like your annoyance, that by definition, makes it an alternative paper.
    With the Trib, you know what you will get every time. Every time I read the New Times there is something new in it.
    And you know Dave, if you wrote up these posts, and submitted them to a newspaper editor, like real journalists do, you would be sent back to verify facts and get real qoutes so fast, your over inflated head would spin.

  8. Dave Congalton
    December 22, 2006 at 8:08 pm

    Dear Anonymous (as in Anonymous #2)

    Of course, you know my response: Anonymous is synonymous with Chickenshit in my book. It’s easy to take cheap shots and attack me, but at least I attach my name to my opinions and I stand behind them.

    And, if you want, you can try to refute anything I’m claiming about New Times, though you won’t because you can’t because you know that I’m right. I’m not making stuff up here.

    And my goal is to give us all the best local media possible. We all suffer when the media falls short.

  9. Alicia in Goldtree
    December 22, 2006 at 8:12 pm

    The Mustang Daily has always been reliable. Prof.Ramos from the LA Times is solid. By the way the Duke lacrosse players are not being charged with rape. Money and a good lawyer always seems to work.

  10. Anonymous
    December 22, 2006 at 9:22 pm

    Why do you let Jerry post? His name calling and all caps style is so immature..7th grade level vitriol. The bombastic style and content isn’t conducive to dialogue.

  11. Anonymous
    December 22, 2006 at 9:42 pm

    Is this the same not-chickenshit Dave Congalton who went on and on about Rob Lowe’s address (reading it over and over again on the air) when the SB News Press scandal was erupting, but who jumped Tom’s shit when he hinted a general area that Dave lives in instead of giving his weirdo “behind the K-Mart” line?

    People post anonymously for a lot of different reasons, Dave.

    As for the constant calls to ban Jerry, why is it that lefties who get their opinion challenged can’t defend their opinions and instead want to restrict the abilities of others to expess theirs?

    The more things change, the more they stay the same.

  12. Dave Congalton
    December 22, 2006 at 9:55 pm

    Nice try anonymous, but if I were trying to build a 15,000 square foot mega mansion in Nipomo, had filed public papers and appeared on public access TV, then , like Rob Lowe, I would sacrifice any and all claim to privacy. His actions in Montecito opened him up for legitimate news coverage.

    But I keep a low profile in Nipomo. If and when I expand my property, I’ll have to step into the limelight.

    Mostly people post Anonymous because if their names were revealed, their bias would become Oh-so-clear.

  13. Guy Murray
    December 23, 2006 at 3:34 am

    Mostly people post Anonymous because if their names were revealed, their bias would become Oh-so-clear.

    I think another, reason is that those who post anonymously is that they are too cowardly to put their names to what they say–not necessarily what they really believe–but their public pronouncements. Maybe they’re the same. Regardless, I think it is because they are nothing more than cowards.

    Guy Murray (not anonymous)
    Nipomo News

  14. BeenThereDoneThat
    December 23, 2006 at 3:39 am

    Sounds to me like you struck a chord with anonymous, Dave. In fact, it sounds like anonymous works at New Times and is trying to defend the vanila-ization of that once biting news product.

    You’re right, Dave. New Times is nowhere near the newspaper Steve Moss started. What you have there is a bunch of posers who think they know journalism, but in fact have bought into the criticism that speaking truth to power is somehow anti-Christian.

    I don’t buy it. And neither should you. Keep up the excellent work, Dave.

  15. Joggerman
    December 23, 2006 at 6:35 am

    I read the cover story and couldn’t figure out why anyone would want to do this story. Then I saw the byline. The reporter is also the editor.

    I don’t know much about newpapers, but is this common where the editor also goes out and writes stories? Who provides the check on him/her to make sure they’re not cramming some kind of social agenda, liberal or negative, at us?

    The story seemed to be all over the place, but then, I walked out of “Passion.” Too violent.

  16. Anonymous
    December 23, 2006 at 4:17 pm

    Question: If anonymous = chickenshit, then who are your sources for the recent New Times posts?

    Come on. Anyone who pretends to know anything about journalism understands that there are valid reasons for anonymity, whether in an article or in a blog post.

    Your comment about names and bias doesn’t make sense either. Bias is obviously in a statement itself, not the name attached. If you can’t figure out bias without a name, then perhaps the bias just isn’t there. It sounds like you want the names just so you can make ad hominem attacks.

    Now, Anonymous #2 does have an evident bias, but he/she makes a good point about fact-checking and getting all sides of a story. Try it at the New Times and see what things have been like since Steve Moss passed on. If it’s not too much work, it should give you some perspective.

    Also Anonymous

  17. Brett
    December 23, 2006 at 6:34 pm

    “Mostly people post Anonymous because if their names were revealed, their bias would become Oh-so-clear.”

    Really?. That’s your argument.

    How about that they have interests that would be jeopardised if they revealed their names when they posted what they really believed not how they are expected to “behave” in a public setting.

    I mean look at Jerry that guy is done, done, done if he ever tries to do anything other than join the KKK.

    Regardless, you are never truly anonymous since your IP address is logged when you visit the blog and post.

  18. Brett
    December 23, 2006 at 6:38 pm

    “WHO GIVES A SHIT?? WELL LET’S LOOK AT THAT QUESTION…
    87% OF AMERICA IS CHRISTIAN, I GUESS THEY CARE!”

    Jerry, how is it then that parental notification has failed to pass even in your state then. How is it that a recent study showed like 9 out of 10 Americans has had premarital sex.

    Just for giggles can you post a link to your “FACTS”.

  19. JerryDinAZ
    December 24, 2006 at 1:03 am

    INTERESTING FEATURE ON THIS BLOG! IF YOU CLICK THE NAME ON THE POST THEY DISAPPEAR! TRY IT…IT’S REALLY COOL!

    FIRST THING I DO WHEN I GET MY READER’S DIGEST IS TEAR ALL THE INSERT ADS OUT AND CHUCK EM

    FIRST THING I DO WHEN I CHECK DAVE’S BLOG IS TO CLICK ALL THE “ANONYMOUS POSTS” AND CHUCK THOSE TOO!

    PEOPLE POST “ANONYMUSLY” BECAUSE THEY ARE GUTLESS COWARDS WITH NO BACKBONE, CLASS OR DIGNITY!

    LET’S ALL MOVE ON…

    BACK TO THE “BORN AGAIN NEW TIMES”!

    I AM LOVING THIS!

  20. Marilyn
    December 24, 2006 at 1:44 am

    Hello Dave,

    I was glad to read of your efforts to clean up the blog. I have decided to comment due to that fact alone.

    I have noticed a lot of change in the New Times style of reporting. I am not happy with them. I miss the substantive reporting. We really lack such a paper in SLO County. Even The Tribune relies on articles by outside journalists and is far from locally comprehensive.

    I think it is great that religious topics are discussed. Religion and/or other forms of spiritual belief are a vital part of people’s lives. We have pushed them into the realm of taboo for a long time now.

    Christianity is the main religion in the United States and, as such, it is normal to have Christian values expressed or discussed. The problem arises when there is intolerance of other religions. We have such a love-hate relationship with our religious traditions and certain traditions have been vilified more than others in this country. Christianity and Islam are the two that are on the spot. It is disheartening reading about the politically correct holiday sentiments. Christmas has also lost its true spirit. I was shopping for something that said “Peace on Earth and Goodwill to All,” a Christian sentiment that I grew up with and that is celebrated throughout the world; I could not find a single store in SLO that had anything resembling peace on earth. It was all about buying stuff and being politically correct. We have forfeited the true and common spirit of our traditions for the purpose of political correctness and political posturing.

    Followers of all religions have conducted themselves atrociously at times in history. Non-religious people have also been capable of the same behavior.

    The print media situation in SLO is pretty dismal. There are a couple of magazines that are printed locally that do not get much mention (is it because they are female centered or female owned and run?). Women’s Press and Information Press. The former comes out every 2 months and the latter is monthly. They address some pretty important topics. I would urge your listeners to check them out.

    Unfortunately, The Tribune is the only daily in SLO and the company that owns it owns a number of other local outlets too.

    Maybe if advertisers can start utilizing magazines such as Hopedance and the other two I mentioned, we might see improvement in the quality and quantity of the local papers.

    It is awesome the dedication of the people who are behind those local magazines since they are doing it without the backing of large corporations and big advertising.

  21. Dave Congalton
    December 24, 2006 at 11:38 am

    Also Anonymous —

    My sources for this post are not anonymous (and note my use of the plural here — I’m hearing from several people at the paper). I know who they are and I choose to protect their p[rivacy.

    My belief is that if we were to identify the Anonymous people on this posting, we’d likely find you to be friends of the publisher or current editor.

    But doesn’t matter — even those people have a right to an opinion. I welcome you to rebut my arguments, which you don’t seem willing to attempt.

    I am merely pointing out that our Alternative Paper of Record seems to be undergoing a major sea change in philosophy. In the months to come, you’ll see a turnover of editorial staff and the disappearance of investigative reporting replaced by an emphasis on upbeat event coverage.

    That’s big news to me.

  22. JerryDinAZ
    December 24, 2006 at 3:14 pm

    DAVE,
    WE THANK YOU FOR POINTING OUT THESE CHANGES AND FOR KEEPING YOUR SOURCES PRIVATE…BUT THE UNDER PINNING HERE ARE NOT MENTIONED. PURE ECONOMICS, BEYOND PHILOSOPHY.

    GOOD NEWS SELLS…THE OLD NEW TIMES SECULAR PROGRESSIVE APPROACH TO EVERYTHING UNDER PINNED BY THE HATE OF ANYTHING BUSH…OR GROWTH…OR CONSERVATIVE FOR THAT MATTER DROVE ADVERTISERS AWAY FROM THE CONSPIRACY THEORY REPORTING.

    THAT APPROACH FAILED! LIKE ANY GOOD BUSINESS THEY REEVALUATED THEIR MARKET AND MADE A COURSE DIRECTION TO BETTER SERVE THEIR ADVERTISERS AND, WHAT THEY PERCEIVE TO BE, THEIR READERS.

    LOOK BEYOND CONSPIRACY AND FAILURE HERE. LOOK TO WHAT CAN BE! LOOK TO THE NEW POSSIBILITIES, AS THE OLD ONES HAVE FAILED.

    IN REALITY IT’S NOT A FAILURE BUT RATHER A NEW BEGINNING! A RE-BIRTHING OF AN OLD AND TIRED APPROACH…ONE THAT HAS FAILED.

    EMBRACE IT…WELCOME IT…REVEL IN THE FACT THAT IN AMERICA A BUSINESS CAN MAKE DECISIONS THAT WILL POSITIVELY EFFECT THEIR FUTURES AS CAN THE PEOPLE.
    IF THE NEW TIMES HAS TURNED TO CHRIST…DON’T YOU THINK IT ALSO WORTHY OF YOUR PERSONAL CONSIDERATION?

    DON’T LOOK AT WHAT WILL BE MISSING FROM THAT OLD SECULAR PROGRESSIVE NEWS PAPER…LOOK TO THE PURE POSSIBILITY OF EMBRACING A NEW APPROACH…A CHRIST APPROACH IN YOUR LIVES…SEE WHAT HAPPENS. YOU MAY BE VERY PLEASANTLY SURPRISED!

    MERRY CHRIST’S PEOPLE DAY!

    HAPPY BIRTHDAY JESUS! WE LOVE YOU!

  23. Dave Congalton
    December 24, 2006 at 3:48 pm

    I offer this as Exhibit B in my case against New Times and its recent embrace of Jesus.

    Here is the second half of the current Shredder — THE SHREDDER. We all remember the Shredder from the good old days, but what the heck is this? He gives out an 800 # to help a local Christian radio station?

    There’s nothing wrong with that, but that news item belongs in County Briefs or in a separate new article. This is not the purpose of the Shredder.

    Read for yourselves and tell me that this is the spirit of good old Shred. And remember that Ryan Miller writes the Shredder.

    DON’T TOUCH THAT DIAL

    My thoughts this time of year have turned as one’s thoughts typically turn at this time of year to the great mysteries of God, Heaven, and their interaction with all of us down here on the Earth. If you believe the folks who tell us that this holiday has less to do with retail (plug your ears, Tom) and more to do with a baby in a manger, this should come as no surprise to you. What may come as a surprise, however, is how on a recent midnight clear (actually, I don’t know the exact time, but it was on Dec. 9), a major storm sent a power surge through K-LIFE’s transmitter. The San Luis Obispo Christian music station 89.3 FM had to borrow equipment just to get itself back on the air at 25 percent power. Yeah, the storm fried the transmitter completely. Destroyed it. It can’t be repaired. Zappo. It couldn’t be more out of commission unless it was transformed into a pillar of salt.

    Some of you may laugh and joke that this was God’s comment on popular Christian music. Some of you may wonder if there even is such a thing as popular Christian music. Well, apparently there is, and instead of making jokes, Mr. I-Only-Listen-to-Jazz, maybe you can overlook your heart that’s two or three sizes too small and get in the spirit of the season. All the Whos down in Who-ville would understand.

    About a week before Christmas, the station announced that it had received about $40,000, though it needs about $20,000 more to get a new transmitter hopefully one that God won’t smite for whatever reason this last one got smote.

    Call 1-888-541-4343 to find out more. I don’t usually give out phone numbers like that, but since my role is something of a community conscience, and my conscience is particularly buzzed on whatever’s in this eggnog at the moment, I decided to step up a little this time around. I mean a storm knocking out a Christian radio station’s transmitter? Talk about a sign from above. The least we can do down below is show a little charity. I, for one, already put in my two cents, but you can feel free to contribute whatever you feel like contributing. Just keep in mind that the weather forecast shows some more clouds rolling in just before Christmas, and we all know that lightning and, I suppose, power surges never strike the same place twice. The transmitter’s already been a bull’s eye. What’s next your house?

  24. Anonymous
    December 24, 2006 at 4:21 pm

    Dave,

    I am also Anonymous. I don’t have any friends at New Times, so I guess, in your words, I must be a “chickenshit” about all this. Perhaps I am. But it’s also the reason why I listen to, but never call in to your radio show. This is a small town, Dave, and word gets around fast. I definitely have opinions, but tend to keep them to myself because my experience has been that people who publicly express opinions do so at the expense of clients, friends, and prospective customers.

    My point is that, in this case, I think you’re assuming too much. I remain out of the spotlight and defer to KVEC, the Tribune, New Times, KSBY, etc. to shape the dialogue and provide me the information I need to know. Overall, I think all of you do a basically decent job and I have no axe to grind.

    In terms of your New Times comments, I can’t say I read the paper much anymore, but shying away from controversy may be a good business move; the advertisers should like this and they are really the main audience for New Times.

    Regarding the religious bias, I’m not sure that one issue is enough to justify a trend, though comments aobut the current Shredder seem spot on. I, too, remember the early days of the Shredder when he was mandatory reading for everyone. So now would we say The Shredder has been born-again????

    Merry Christmas, Dave. Merry Christmas everyone. Stop blogging and go spend time with loved ones.

  25. Pope Anonymous I
    December 24, 2006 at 4:55 pm

    Jerry,

    You are just dreaming in you really really believe that 87% of American’s are Christians! Perhaps you and the so-called pastor Doug are members the type of Christians you are talking about. The ones that think they are earning their way in this life by being born in America, their parents attended a religious denomination, or they believe in a higher power. Yeah, maybe 87% do fall under that my friend, but there is no way in the US that 87% of Americans have given their life and heart to Christ. Think about it.

  26. ernie madonna
    December 24, 2006 at 7:40 pm

    I saw that Shredder, too. I was also surprised by the tone.

    Somewhere in the Midwest right now, Sharon Graves must be having the last laugh!

  27. JerryDinAZ
    December 24, 2006 at 8:20 pm

    THE SHREDDER WAS A HATE ARTICLE UNTIL THE NEW EDITOR SWEETENED THE POT, SO TO SPEAK WITH JESUS!

    IT WAS ANONYMOUS BUT NOT REALLY, AND ATTRIBUTABLE ONLY TO THE ALREADY LEFTY SECULAR PROGRESSIVE PAPER.

    SLO CITY IS, AND HAS BEEN, A CHEAP RUMOR FACTORY WITH THE UNDERGROUND SECULAR PROGRESSIVES DESTROYING MANY GOOD AND DECENT PEOPLE. BUT THANK GOD THOSE DAYS ARE OVER!

    THE LEFTY “DESTROY & HATE” TACTICS JUST DON’T CUT IT ANYMORE…LOCALLY OR NATIONALLY.

    SO WHERE CAN YOU NOW GET YOUR JUICY SALACIOUS GOSSIP BASTED IN A THICK GRAVY OF HATE? WELL, IT LOOKS LIKE YOU CAN’T!

    SO NOW WHAT? BITCH & MOAN & MOAN & BITCH? TO WHAT END? YOU HAD THAT RAG FOR DECADES AND IT NEVER MADE ANY MONEY. SO LET’S GIVE SOMEONE ELSE A TRY.

    ARE YOU AFRAID IT WILL FLOURISH AND EXPAND? ARE YOU WORRIED THAT CHRISTIANITY ON THE CENTRAL COAST WILL NO LONGER STAY QUIET WHILE CAL POLY PROFESSORS RUIN OUR YOUTH?

    ARE YOU WORRIED THAT THE LEFT LEANING CRYSTAL WEARING, TREE HUGGING, ALTERNATIVE LIFE STYLE, PATULLI COVERED, BIRKENSTOCK SHOD, VOLVO DRIVING, NEW AGE, TAX SUPPORTED, SECULAR PROGRESSIVES WILL HAVE TO GO ELSEWHERE FOR YOUR LOCAL POISON?
    OR
    ARE YOU MAD THAT “WE” GOT YOUR NEWSPAPER? YOU SEE? IT’S REALLY ALL ABOUT THE RADICAL LEFT BEING SO HATEFUL TOWARDS TRADITIONAL CULTURE WARRIOR AMERICANS THAT ARE TAKING BACK OUR NATION!

    IF NOT…WHAT’S THE RUB? IT’S A TINY NEWSPAPER! START ANOTHER ONE AND SUPPORT THE HECK OUT OF IT! CALL IT THE “SP CHRONICLES” AND CALL THE OLD SHREDDER THE “MINCER” OR “CHOPPER” OR BETTER YET THE “HATER”.

    THE JURY IS NOT OUT! THE “BORN AGAIN NEW TIMES” IS HERE AND THE OLD ONE IS GONE! MOVE ON! IT’S CAPITALISM AT ITS BEST! OOPS! MY BAD! I KNOW YOU OLD “NT” SUPPORTERS PREFER A GOOD OLD DOSE OF SOCIALISM!

  28. bob from San Luis
    December 24, 2006 at 10:57 pm

    JerryD: As much as I resist, you keep pulling me back in to comment on your untended irony. New Times can change their name to “The New Religious Times” or “The New Christian Times” for all I care; doing so will not change the fact that they would not be doing any “hard news” stories based on the solid reporting by those who Dave mentioned. Perhaps they could focus on all of the “good” news stories that the right believes is ignored by the so-called Liberal Media. Just think of all of the great things our military has done in Iraq that could be reported on (and I say that with no intended sarcasm). As to New Times having a Christian slant as a means to make them profitable, I for one think you must be delusional. The one single reason New Times has had a viable voice in our community is because they have reported on topics the Tribune won’t touch like Dave says. If they abandon that core value as their mission, they will fall into a non-relevant status as a local weekly paper.
    Oh, and Jerry, about the irony I mentioned before, I know you think that posting in all caps makes your posts more distinctive, but when you call anybody else a “hater” and it posted in all caps, that, is irony. Merry Christmas Jerry, may you find the peace that Jesus taught us to seek.

  29. kevin cleary
    December 25, 2006 at 12:18 am

    If The Shredder isn’t going to “shred” people any more, perhaps they need a new title, one more in keeping with their new friendly tone.

    The Redeemer?

  30. Santa Maria Jerry
    December 25, 2006 at 3:37 am

    New Times going “god squad” shows that the paper is looking for more ad support from the opposite sex marriage crowd. Steve’s paper is all but gone.

  31. The Pope
    December 25, 2006 at 5:13 am

    Jerry,

    It is a good thing that the Nude Times is keeping it’s erotic services section open for you, and the gay preacher dude in Colarato to find the tasty treats that you lack in Ariboner for you visits here.

    That is a Christian value for sure.

  32. Brett
    December 25, 2006 at 6:16 am

    Jerry you are crazy. Not the good kind of crazy either. Like crazy funny, or that was crazy (as in good). I’m talking about the good old psychotic crazy.

    Oh, and Jerry will you stop using the term “traditional family values” when you really mean “traditional christian religous values” as you see them. Ooh, that doesn’t sound to good like that does it.

    Jerry I suggest you spend Christmas day really thinking about how Jesus would treat the people you seem to hate so much. I think Jesus would take much pity on you.

  33. NewLifer
    December 25, 2006 at 7:48 am

    I don’t understand why everyone is picking on New Times for turning to Jesus for inspiration.

    Personally I applaud that decision and it will make me more likely to start reading New Times. I’m sure it will be available at The Parable now and that will make it even easier to read.

    So I agree with Jerry. What’s wrong with a newspaper turning to Christ? Does anyone have a problem with a reporter who happens to be a Christian? We need more, not less.

  34. Dave Congalton
    December 26, 2006 at 5:24 am

    Hey NewLifer,

    Nobody has a problem with a reporter who is Christian, but read the sample of this week’s Shredder I posted.

    I’ve been around long enough to remember the early days of that column, designed to be a forum to comment on public officials misbehaving, people stepping over the line (and yes, I’ve been shredded more than a few times over the years).

    But to have the Shredder devote half a column to a local radio station being knocked off the air and asking people to CALL IN AND DONATE $$$$$. That violates the spirit of the column designed by Steve Moss.

    And I fear it’s only the beginning.

  35. alan park
    December 26, 2006 at 5:02 pm

    Next week New Times cover story “Bible covers, how to choose one”.

  36. Anonymous
    December 26, 2006 at 10:02 pm

    No, next week’s cover story: AN UP CLOSE AND PERSONAL PROFILE OF JERRY DAGNA

  37. Current New Times Hack
    December 28, 2006 at 8:36 pm

    Dave,

    You may be the lone voice, but I think you are the correct voice. I have been blissfully ignorant, and did not know that Ryan was instilling his faith beliefs into the paper, but a reread of last weeks issue was extremely unsettling and downright nauseating. I absolutely could not read any of the article about the passion of christ and the rest of that drivel. (I have never seen the movie either for that matter). The shredder which has been a hollow parody of the original since the death of Steve Moss was equally creepy and pathetic. As a result, I did go back through your blog spot and read some of the comments, and as usual I was made ill by that pathetic blowhard Jerry Dagna and his minions who seem to be applauding the transformation of the New Times into an “upbeat Christian rag”, which will probably elevate the paper from its present position of declining importance to the level of the good time newspaper put out by David Weyrick a few years back

  38. lloyd
    December 28, 2006 at 8:57 pm

    New Times has become nothing more than a right wing bible thumping piece of crap. Who does this guy ryan think he is destroying the best paper that was ever on the central coast. Give me back my old New Times.

  39. Anonymous
    December 28, 2006 at 9:25 pm

    Dave,

    Reading your “New Times RIP” post stirred up a rich brew of memories from my time working at New Times – as a Cal Poly intern back in 1992 and in 1993 as the paper’s first full-time staff reporter. Wow. Has it really been almost 15 years?!

    And I am so humbled to see my name icluded in that list of so many writers I have so admired over the years.

    I, too, mourn the loss of an alternative publication with a sincere commitment and willingness to dig deep into important local issues. The sad reality is that in this time of media consolidation and corporatization, most daily papers are not willing to take on controversial issues and/or to give their reporters the time and latitude necessary to do justice to complex issues. The even sadder reality, I fear, is that many media consumers don’t really care – as seems to be evidenced by many of the comments to your post.

    I would like to think that when advertisers hear from New Times sales reps that the paper will now focus on “events coverage” large numbers of them would decide that perhaps their advertising budget might be better spent elsewhere, though I am not sure where that might be.

    Perhaps a new publication (or website) run by people with the drive, talent and savvy to take on the challenge of covering important local issues that will shape our future together will rise from the ashes of the New Times so many of us knew and loved.

    I hope so.

    Thanks, Dave. And don’t let those anonymous assholes get you down!

    Anne McMahon

  40. JerryDinAZ
    December 28, 2006 at 11:25 pm

    LLOYD,
    WE WILL GIVE BACK YOUR NEW TIMES…WHEN YOU GIVE US BACK OUR COUNTRY!
    DEAL?

  41. Santa Maria Jerry
    December 29, 2006 at 12:11 am

    Why don’t the opposite sex marriage crew just get over their hangups. Turn the page, get on the current page of today. Lets get real and move forward, God will take care of you.

  42. jerryisanAZ
    December 29, 2006 at 4:25 am

    I guess it’s not “our” Country. It’s only for the religous conservative christians.

    “WHEN YOU GIVE US BACK OUR COUNTRY!’

  43. CRASH
    December 30, 2006 at 8:58 pm

    Quite frankly I am ashamed of being sucked into this but here goes:

    Your position of “Believe what you want, but leave your beliefs at the door” is naïve and humorous considering the source.

    I typically listen to your show on my commute home, which is thankfully very short. But no matter, I always seem to get irritated with some thing. It is different each time, but most of the time is stems from your total lack of objectivity or logical reasoning. Here’s my favorite example:

    During a “discussion” with the pastor from AG that comes on your show fairly regularly, the topic was gay marriage. Obviously, this is an emotional and controversial topic, and one about which you and your guest would likely disagree. At one point, the question of a scientific or medical basis for homosexuality was poised. This is your response as close as I can recall it:

    “How can you argue with science. Science has proven homosexuality is genetic. It’s a proven fact. How can you disagree with that!”

    I lost all respect for you at that moment (as well as control of my car from laughter). Have you never heard of this headline from the 1990s: “Eggs cause cholesterol.” How about this one a few years later: “Eggs aren’t as bad as originally thought, may be good for you!”

    WHAT! What is proven cannot be unproven! Don’t they know that! You can’t disagree with science.

    Ever since then, I am amazed how many other logical fallacies are uttered every hour on your show. In fact, I proposed to a friend of mine who teaches Critical Thinking, that she should have her students listen to your show and catalog them. Having listened to your show herself, she loved the idea. I will let you know how that goes.

    You let your beliefs enter into that discussion. When asked for your sources, you had none. Not that it matters, because for every 10 saying one thing, 10 say the opposite. Are you the only one who decides with set of 10 is correct. The fact is, you are not able to have someone on your show, and not have your beliefs be front and center.

    Now, I realize that is what you are paid to do. But, try it sometime. Separate your belief from your work, and check them at the door. Do it for one week. You cannot. Very few can.

    And besides, aren’t you are a journalist? Please feel free to fill in the huge gaps that are being left out there by the New Times. I would say your audience is of a similar size. (Never mind the fact, as you even point out the Trib is neglectful in its reporting. But they are not the focus of your ire today. That’s for next weeks ratings.) But remember, leave your beliefs at the door.

    But be careful. Because, unless I am mistaken, isn’t that what the German soliders were convicted of: checking their morality at the door, and just doing their job.

    Extreme example for sure, but does highlight the “damned if you do, damned if you don’t” aspect of this discussion.

    So remember my challenge. If you can’t do it, then I think you owe some people at the NT an apology.

    Your show. No personal beliefs. One week. Unfortunately, I will probably be listening. So surprise me.

  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: