There may be 52,000 weekday San Francisco subscribers to the Chronicle, but that does not mean only 52,000 “pay” to read the paper. If a household family of four reads the Chron, isn’t the whole family “paying,” or only the check-writer? More to the point, does it really matter who in the family is paying if there are four people reading?

If there are two San Francisco readers for each S.F. subscriber (a conservative estimate, I think), then suddenly your “one in 16” payers falls to one in eight, a huge difference.

Perhaps you never considered the above because, as a news junkie, you never shared your newspaper.

I also agree with Tom H., that the Chronicle’s poor product has a great deal to do with its demise.

“Today, many young people eschew newspapers in favor of niche news sites and opinionated blogs.
It’s now possible to read only news that fits your ideology or interests.”

That last sentence warrants a lot discussion and I would like to see an op/ed from you in the
future on it. I have friends who only listen to certain radio and T-V stations because of the
station bias, left and right, and it only seems to make them more opinionated and passionate in
their beliefs. I myself have almost quit watching T-V, especially the news, and only listen to the radio
stations who read the news like KCBS. I am so turned off with newspapers in the East Bay that
I skim the articles quickly, read the op/ed page and move on the comics and crossword. I get more
out of the comics page than I do the so called news items. The journalism quality is not what
it used to be and there are numerous errors. Except for the advertisements….they rarely make a
mistake in the ads.
Regards, Byron C

Who instigated the removal of civics courses from the public schools curriculum?

When?

Why?

Sincerely,
Antonia L

Sure, there’s the larger question of how newspapers fit into a world where everyone will increasingly rely in digital solutions for their news. But that’s a challenge all newspapers face, some much more successfully than others. For example, as a subscriber to the Wall St. Journal online since the mid-90s when I was one of their first 50 pilot customers, I’ve learned first-hand that I don’t need the feel of newsprint in my hands to stay informed (and I’m an old baby boomer). The demand for news hasn’t subsided, just the way we consume it. Smart news organizations get that and they evolve.

I’ve been a consummate consumer of news media all my life, since my journalism days in Iowa and later as an international ad exec. I’ve lived in markets where newspapers have always been political mouthpieces (especially in their front page ‘news’ articles, not just op-ed pages). Also, we Americans have been grossly mislead to believe that our news journalism was ever very unbiased. Any serious student of history will know that’s never been the case.

As a social moderate, fiscal conservative, I was never a great fan of the SF Chronicle (or the NY Times), but I read them as part of my mantra to try to stay objective and ‘informed’. If I want objectivity, I go to The Economist or any number of international papers who get their news coverage from somewhat less biased sources — although I’ve found none that are without bias.

When I moved to the Bay Area in the late 90s, I naturally subscribed to the Chronicle. I’ve since canceled my subscription and don’t even bother to refer to their online service any more. Why? The product, while not great to start with, has eroded to a point where I could no longer tolerate reading the paper. The often radical political bent of so many so-called hard news stories is offensive and certainly violates my trust in trying to stay informed. The content and format of the paper has increasingly tuned out a broad swath of the public and reduced the Chronicle to the radical rag they’ve molded themselves into. They simply misread their market, alienated too many customers with a poor product that exudes a political bias that appeals to a much slimmer base that they think. Couple bad marketing with a poor product and the Chronicle’s woes should surprise no one.

So, two key reasons for the Chronicle’s demise in the face of other papers which remain relatively unscathed: 1) poor product, poorly written, poorly presented, very little pretense of any objective news coverage; and 2) it has ignored fundamental marketing and no longer appeals to a vast portion of potential customers within it’s catchment area. I for one, wish the Chronicle a speedy demise along with its holier-than-thou pretensions. Perhaps out of the ashes will rise a product that better serves the real market demand in a more responsible and less biased way. That’s what our free-market system is all about.

Your article did a disservice by not including some reference or speculation to why the Chronicle is faring so much worse than almost every other major daily in the nation. To suggest that their woes are simply the result of the digital age is, I believe, incorrect and irresponsible. You may or may not agree with my assessment, but please at least don’t avoid addressing the elephant in the room.

I enjoy reading your articles, whether or not I agree with you — which I usually do not. Nevertheless, they’re well-written and usually do a credible job of advancing an idea in a thoughtful, reflective manner.

Best regards,
Tom H

Although we are at different poles of the political spectrum, I always enjoy your columns.

I started to read the Chronicle in the mid fifties, when I was a student at Berkeley. Later, I moved to S.F. Later more, to Marin. The columnists you note were dear to me, especially McCabe. Herb printed three of my submissions, and of course gave me credit, as he always did. The Chronicle kindly published a lot of my letters to the editor over the years. It was a lot of fun for me.

In later years these column giants were gone. I eventually I became weary of the Chronicle’s heavy focus on gay/lesbian issues. It seemed to crowd out news that would be more interesting to me. I am OK with the gay lesbians, but have no more interest in a gay lesbian newspaper than I would, for example, a vegetarian or nudist newspaper. So, a couple of years ago I cancelled, terminating a fifty year tradition, with sadness. I followed Matier & Ross in the website for a while, but this required remembering to do it, and so fell by the wayside.

Thanks for the trip down memory lane.

Best, Bob K

Sincerely,
Nancy H

What journalists need is more education in statistics, economics, business, etc.. What the media needs is tougher editing so the public can believe what they read. Thank you.

Sincerely,

Dick H

I give as much as I can to KQED and NPR. NPR gives me all the stories I missed on Radio through Facebook. It’s a changing world indeed. The 24/7 news cycle has proven deadly.