The problem isn't "NYT needs to engage more with social". The problem is that the Times needs to figure out how to be RELEVANT.
Let's start with this: be hyper-local. I should be able to easily plan a trip and tour to New York without ever leaving the NYT website. I should be able to know every single Broadway and off-Broadway play that will be running when I get there and be able to get tickets NOW.
Reporting: How about being actively antagonistic toward government? How about real, hard-hitting government coverage? How about tracing every single dollar, favor, and deal until the politicians don't just hate you, but actively FEAR you.
Editorial: how about some informed opinion pieces? How about starting to peel apart complex topics in multiple parts and report TRUTH rather than both sides?
Gee, you know, that sounds like a ... newspaper. Shame this country doesn't actually have one anymore.
Sure, the NYT gets their lunch stolen, but mostly by one offs.
An aggregate of clever obits. A repackaging of Nelson Mandela's death. Could you predict those IN ADVANCE? Doubtful. Chasing them is like saying "We need to create Gangnam Style". Great. But it isn't going to happen.
NYT is a newpaper read worldwide (as an example, I'm french and I read it). People read it to have deep insight on subjects at first, even if they may be interested secondary in topics like album reviews.
I do not think it is relevant for them to cover everything in american towns even if most of their reader are in USA. Local newspapers are the ones who should do that. They cannot cover everything without expanding greatly their number of journalists. And I do not think they have the resources for that.
Gee that sound a like a billion dollars a year and a fundamental misconception of how news reporting works when deadlines, personal biases, and large groups of people get involved.
The times needs the government officials just as much as the officials need the times. Its a delicate dance and you can't just burn bridges.
Noble goals but come on.
> Editorial: how about some informed opinion pieces? How about starting to peel apart complex topics in multiple parts and report TRUTH?
Literally what Fox news believers say about the times.
Let's start with this: be hyper-local. I should be able to easily plan a trip and tour to New York without ever leaving the NYT website. I should be able to know every single Broadway and off-Broadway play that will be running when I get there and be able to get tickets NOW.
Reporting: How about being actively antagonistic toward government? How about real, hard-hitting government coverage? How about tracing every single dollar, favor, and deal until the politicians don't just hate you, but actively FEAR you.
Editorial: how about some informed opinion pieces? How about starting to peel apart complex topics in multiple parts and report TRUTH rather than both sides?
Gee, you know, that sounds like a ... newspaper. Shame this country doesn't actually have one anymore.
Sure, the NYT gets their lunch stolen, but mostly by one offs.
An aggregate of clever obits. A repackaging of Nelson Mandela's death. Could you predict those IN ADVANCE? Doubtful. Chasing them is like saying "We need to create Gangnam Style". Great. But it isn't going to happen.