Newspapers subscribe to various feeds, such as AP, UP, and in this case, the NYTimes feed. Up until now, the Seattle PI has had the NYTimes feed during the week, and the Seattle Times was only allowed to print stories from it on the weekends. So, my question is: does the Seattle PI still have the NYTimes feed? How much closer are we to being a one paper town? Will 2008 be the year? And since media consolidation is so "in", when are we going to have Stranger TV?

definitely strange/not fun to read an article in the PI days after i've read it in the ny times.

It does seem strange, especially since Paul Krugman, Bob Herbert and Maureen Dowd's points of view are usually so at odds with the Blethen family and their shabby collection of editorial writers. Maybe they will just run pieces by Thomas Friedman, David Brooks, and the latest NYT addition -- William Kristol. The dreary WaPo gang they current feature (Krauthammer, Broder, etc.) seem like a much better fit.

2008 is going to be the year of media consolidation, both vertical (same mega corporation owning both the daily paper and the TV station in medium sized towns) and horizontal (more trust-busting eligible corporations gobbling up the small players).

And you thought 2007 was bad ...

The Times wrested the rights from the P-I; only one paper in each market gets it. So this was competition, not consolidation. (Emily G: not weekends, Sundays only--when the Times and P-I put out a joint Sunday edition that's mostly Times stuff.)

Wouldn't it just be a lot easier to steal their articles - er, link to their articles - like Slog does?

Josh, what an insipid post. The Times gains the rights to some of the best newspaper reporting on the planet, making it possible to replace the often weak AP wire on major news stories. And they get to offer the NY Times crossword, again the best of its kind. All in all, it's an improvement to the paper at a time when newspapers everywhere are doing nothing but cutting.

Yet somehow you can twist it into another one of your relentless slams. I used to dismiss those who accused you of being jealous because you couldn't get hired on at one of the dailies (and make about half the salary of their reporters), but I must admit I'm starting to wonder if they don't have a point.

Hey, Tom -- your greed is showing! Why do you assume Josh cares about working at a daily, and why do you assume he feels he's paid an unlivable wage?

Sure, most people would like to make more money, but given the apples to oranges aspect of the Stranger vs. The P-I Times, and the fact that the former is actually relevant to people who make this city culturally and even politically survivable, why would Josh even want to work there?

Maybe -- just maybe -- you'd admit to enunciating out of your anal canal? Or at least to assigning your own $$$ = worth equation to Josh's no doubt quite different value set?

Just a thought.

I've spent two hours mulling over Josh's attack on the Seattle Times and I can't make any sense of it. So what if they are against media consolidation and they want to add NYT content?

I don't have a theory for why Josh has it in for them, but surely he has an axe to grind here.

Well, Cornball, it's well-known Josh (as well as Erica) has tried to get a job at the dailies. So perhaps it's your anus that is spewing crap.

As I said, I never subscribed to that theory before, but the evidence is mounting (as elenchos points out).

Jubilation, I mean Josh: It's clear you've never worked at anything other than the Springfield Shopper or some giveaway tab with calendar listings like the Stranger. Any good wire editor knows the more sources you have to choose from, the better. The NYT feed is a good thing; much better than the Reuters or Gannett offers. Your feeble attempts to stir the turd when it comes to anything the Times or the PI does just comes off as this sneering little 13-year-old boy who keeps getting left out of the big game. It's common knowlege that the Stranger doesn't pay their staffers well; how many of you were beating down the PI's door when the Arts editor job opened up? Yes, it's "safe to assume" you're being paid an unliveable wage. I don't know how old you are - and it's hard to tell from your columnist mug where you appear to be laughing at your shoes for some reason - but eventually you're going to want a little more in life than Top Ramen. Any maybe by then you'll understand the newspaper business a lot better than you do now. It's all shits 'n' giggles over there at the oh-so-hilarious and EDGY Stranger office, isn't it? Good luck getting a real job there, Shorts.

Oh jeezis crappin' christ, where the hell did you go to J-School? Adding a wire service is NOT media consolidation. Did you not have to pass com-law to graduate?

Since The Times and the P/I are so evil and hypocritical, I suggest Slog go a whole day without linking to one of their stories.

Good luck with that.

Sorry #5, but you're wrong. Both papers will have the New York Times wire service. Seattle was the last market where one paper had the service exclusively.

This isn't the big news the Times would have you believe. Both the Times and P-I will succeed or fail on their local coverage, not their reprinting of stories from the New York Times. Anyone who really wants to read the New York Times can do so on the Times web site. Before the Internet this would have been a big deal, but now ... not so big.

Prospero @ 14:

Finally a comment on this thread that provides the needed perspective. Thank you.

Bow wow!

SHOOT ME, FRANK!!! PLEASE! GOD! SHOOT ME!

Bow wow. Woof. Bow wow.

Frank -- I'm speaking to you. You hear my voice in your head.

BOW WOW, FRANK!!! SHOOT ME!!! PLEASE FOR THE LOVE OF CHRIST!!!

So why does Josh Feit keep ducking the question of how much staff at the Stranger is paid?

C'mon tough guy, answer.

Josh, from the Seattle Times online:

"NOTE TO READERS: Beginning today, seattletimes.com and The Seattle Times newspaper will be even better. In addition to the best news coverage of the Pacific Northwest from our staff, we will provide coverage of the nation and world daily from The New York Times."

How is this statement gleeful? How does this equal consolidation? As a local paper (that is losing money) the Seattle Times can't possibly provide national and international coverage the way NYT can. They rely on sources like AP, Reuters and other larger papers for most of that coverage. They can either choose to limit their coverage to local only, or add some high-quality reporting from other sources. Personally I think the latter is the better option. I enjoy the Stranger, but you guys really do try to make mountains out of molehills sometimes.

You really do have some kind of ax to grind, Josh. Your perspective makes absolutely no sense. The Seattle Times doesn't have staffers covering international and national news. It is, and always has been, a regional paper. This has nothign to do with consolidation. Josh, you have "issues".

Geez, this city's daily newspapers sure employ a lot of whiny jerks.

Geez, the Stranger sure employs a lot of sky-is-falling clueless dickheads.