Step in Drudge veteran Andrew Breibart‘s Big Journalism. Patrick Frey aka Patterico hopes to help kill a dying institution, how brave. He writes in his debut post:

Like most newspapers, circulation at the L.A. Times has been plummeting for years. The paper’s parent company has declared bankruptcy. The L.A. Times now announces several rounds of layoffs every year. My spies tell me morale is basically nonexistent. The paper used to make a profit; I doubt it still does. Reporters and editors alike believe the paper’s days are numbered.

And it’s only going to get worse. We’re watching death in slow motion.

I have mixed feelings about this, because many of the individuals there are likable people. But the arrogance has to go. The disregard for facts has to go. If that means that the institution must die, then so be it.

You can help kill it, and replace it with something better. That’s what I think Big Journalism is all about.

The billionaire mogul Chairman and Chief Executive of the Tribune Company, Sam Zell is a right-wing tool bag who’s destroyed the company by mismanagement, short-sightedness and leveraging it to death and because of that he’s getting sued by his employees. So as a right-leaner hoping to “kill” the Los Angeles Times, some other righty beat you to it.

And it’s really easy, with some old journalism “mainstream media” investigation er fact-checking to find out if and how much profit the Tribune Company makes, it has share holders. But “horrible arrogant LAT makes mistakes sometimes and should die.”

But what do we know? We’re the “mainstream media.” We’ll post our desire for a correction on a cork board at the local YMCA.

LAObserved post is here. Gawker run down is here.

Found via I Want Media

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.

Today’s question was:

What’s eating the L.A. Times? Would the paper be better off outside the Tribune Co. empire? All week, Marc Cooper and Patrick Frey discuss the future of The Times and journalism in Southern California.

The ‘readers’ respond. Some say it’s the Chandler family’s fault. Some blame their paper delivery people. Some blame Sam Zell.

Then there were these comments:

For years you have encouraged the increased immigration of Third World people and their numerous offspring to this area. Now you have a population that cannot read a sophisticated English-language newspaper.

And these:

Advocacy journalism is the reason why I stopped subscribing. The only difference between the Times and Lou Dobbs is that Dobbs is less secretive. With Southern California being on the illegal immigration frontline, there is a great story to tell from the perspective of our economic, political, human-behavioral, and education systems, a portent for the nation. However, as Lou Dobbs reports only a certain view, so does the Times. For example, last week, the NY Times and others reported that illegal immigration was the EU’s biggest concern. The Times did not. While La Raza and others may protest Dobbs, we protest the Times’ by unsubscribing.

And these:

It’s simple. We don’t trust what you write and you don’t have the guts to just admit you are pushing an agenda.. Your PRO-Illegal immigration stance is a real turn off to your subscribers, which made me cancel my subscription.. How can the Times be going under there are plenty of Illegals to subcribe now, so you don’t need me paying for subscriptions.

continued…

New Career Opportunities Daily: The best jobs in media.