Because Less is More !

So, let’s watch them speed up their race to further irrelevancy.

In an era when Jeopardy has blatant product-placement quiz questions about brand-name aspirin products– and then tries to play them off like it’s classical music or Greek sculpture– something like this should not be a surprise:

Starting March 5, people who do not subscribe to the Los Angeles Times print edition will be asked to buy an online subscription. Those who don’t will be able to read 15 stories in a 30-day period for free.

The move, however, will not affect the websites fortitles under the Times Community News division of the company, including the Glendale News-Press, Burbank Leader, La Cañada Valley Sun and Pasadena Sun, along with several others in Orange County.

“I applaud the Los Angeles Times’ bold move regarding their membership plan,” said Dan Evans, editor of the four Los Angeles-area community news titles. “For now, however, our websites will remain as they are.”

Of course he’d say that. This is the same guy who was absolutely appalled a few years ago that websites weren’t vetting their anonymous commenters, and then praised the idea of requiring everyone to sign in with their Facebook accounts before they could post anything. So what else is he going to think.

If you pay for it then it must be better. Right?

And speaking of making things better, the Times is also getting rid of their Food, Home and Health sections, and wrapping their equivalents into a so-called “Saturday” edition.

That’s right. There’s no better way of making sure that your print version is attractive and worth paying for than to make it even less attractive and with nothing in it. This must be something young people dig– you know, that target audience who they’re so worried about pulling away from online game sites. Those voracious readers and all– the ones who would be so eager to read a newspaper if only someone would put it on their Kindles and then charge them piecemeal for it.

We are excited to reimagine some of our distinctive feature coverage and present it with a fresh, bold point of view.

Yeah, uh-huh.

P.S. Remember the days when things were free because they had ads in them? Or that the reason why you paid for things was because they didn’t have ads?

Like movie theaters?

So when the hell did this change? And why did people ever let it?

Now we’re paying for ads. How come?