619864 Thu May 14 11:43:13 -0700 2009 52 33 Food Media and News 0 4683820 He will maintain a food-based column in the Sunday Times Magazine: http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/05/14/frank-bruni-moving-to-times-magazine-bill-keller-announces/ Thu May 14 11:43:13 -0700 2009 102095 vvvindaloo 1 4683854 Too bad, I like his style and the strong reporting he brings to his reviews. Upside is that perhaps there will less food-related drivel in the Sunday magazine like Amanda Hesser's "wow I bagged a rich dude" and "icky recipe from 1492 reimagined" pieces and that guy who's trying to turn his 2-year-old into a foodie. Thu May 14 11:53:24 -0700 2009 4683820 100412 newhavener07 2 4685550 We are on the same hater wavelength. The whole "Mr. Latte" thing still makes my skin crawl, as does Ms. Hesser's fawning over Spice Market in exchange for JGV blurbing her book (I am too lazy to look this up, but I'm pretty sure I remember correctly). Until I read Cooking With Dexter, I thought my least favorite food writer shtick ever was shoehorning the opinions of one's significant other into restaurant reviews. It's very sad, because I really enjoy Pete Wells' writing. But I don't give a damn about what his son likes to eat. I am not a 4-year-old; I don't eat like a 4-year-old; there are no 4-year-olds living in my house. Do not care. I will miss Bruni, except for his review of the steakhouse in the strip club, which was an abomination. Thu May 14 20:55:15 -0700 2009 4683854 13722 small h 3 4686532 Yeah, the whole "child foodie" trend makes my skin crawl. It's up there with baby beauty pageants and tween thongs in the creepy precocity sweepstakes. Let the kids have their chicken nuggets--they'll have plenty of time to enjoy sweetbreads and pork belly later on. Fri May 15 08:38:23 -0700 2009 4685550 100412 newhavener07 4 4694417 I agree re the current food columnists in then magazine - the only one bearable is Sam Sifton. I think they need a solid food writer with a whole lot less self- regard (Hesser is too precious by half and I find the Dexter series gag-inducing, but then I'm not overly fond of stories about children I don't know or am unrelated to, in general). Mon May 18 11:43:02 -0700 2009 4686532 13709 buttertart 5 4695038 They all make me miss Johnny Apple. Dearly. Mon May 18 14:16:18 -0700 2009 4694417 32444 MakingSense 5 4919711 You're in luck! http://www.observer.com/2009/media/sam-sifton-your-next-food-critic-new-york-times Wed Aug 05 10:23:54 -0700 2009 4694417 13722 small h 6 4919819 That's great, glad to hear it. Bruni was quite good, I expect Sifton will be better. He has the good grace not to drag his personal life into his food writing. Wed Aug 05 10:54:03 -0700 2009 4919711 13709 buttertart 7 4919864 I've been a fan of Sifton's since he wrote about food for the New York Press. When the New York Press was actually sort of good. And dinosaurs roamed the earth. I'm a bit surprised by two things: that Sifton would give up the Culture Editor spot, and that the NYT would just throw up its ladylike gray hands and say to hell with trying to find someone who can dine unrecognized. I'm looking forward to seeing whether the reviews change as a result of that. And I blame Restaurant Girl, because why not. Wed Aug 05 11:03:24 -0700 2009 4919819 13722 small h 8 4919869 Around 97-98? Wed Aug 05 11:04:52 -0700 2009 4919864 10195 KTinNYC 9 4919905 I couldn't pinpoint an exact moment, but I'd give the NYP a couple more years than that, since Strausbaugh was a pretty good editor, and he was there 'til 2002. Jim Knipfel getting fired was when the last drop of quality leached out of that paper. Wed Aug 05 11:14:08 -0700 2009 4919869 13722 small h 10 4919941 I just looked in the wikipedia article and my memory is almost correct. Russ Smith sold NY Press in 2002 so the Press may have been good until 2000 because i recall the paper running on fumes for the last few years before the sale. Wed Aug 05 11:21:11 -0700 2009 4919905 10195 KTinNYC 11 4920678 I so wanted it to be better that I probably remember the good more than the bad. Then again, I have a pretty clear recollection of Amy Sohn's body of work. Bleah. Wed Aug 05 14:26:06 -0700 2009 4919941 13722 small h 12 4920735 "Body of work" very funny when it comes to Amy Sohn's oeuvre. What, you didn't like to hear every detail of Amy's sexual adventures? In it's prime NY Press was awesome. They knocked The Village Voice off their throne and made them into a free weekly. I barely remember the days of the Voice being unavailable for free. I remember going to 2 NY Press parties in the Puck building. They were fun but I recall Russ Smith to be a pompous ass. I also recall often seeing Jim Knipfel, Amy Sohn, and a number of NY Press staffers drinking in the bar housed in the old Knitting Factory. Wed Aug 05 14:44:51 -0700 2009 4920678 10195 KTinNYC 13 4921310 I wouldn't have minded reading about La Sohn's adventures if she was less full of herself (among other things). Of course, I also read her column in NYMag, because I am a masochist. I figured that Russ Smith was a pompous ass, but I never met him, and I thought the whole I'm-writing-under-the-name-Mugger-but-no-one-knows-it's-really-me-Russ-Smith-haha conceit was unbelievably tiresome. But when you think about it, Gawker et al. owe a lot to him, and his habit of 'splaining the big boy newspapers to us proles. Wed Aug 05 18:30:25 -0700 2009 4920735 13722 small h 14 4921451 I agree. Much respect for NY Press because they were new media before new media. Wed Aug 05 19:34:20 -0700 2009 4921310 10195 KTinNYC 15 4921479 And free, before everything was free. I'm thisclose to picking up the NYP again, now. Prescient bastards that they are. Wed Aug 05 19:42:38 -0700 2009 4921451 13722 small h 15 4921494 And they hired Jim Leff to write restaurant reviews, way back when, which for all I know could somehow have helped lead to the creation of Chowhound. Wed Aug 05 19:48:44 -0700 2009 4921451 10074 Caitlin McGrath 4 4697707 My other issue with the "Cooking with Dexter" columns is that none of it applies to my life. I am not allergic to gluten and neither is my child. I don't need to know how to adapt recipes to a wheat-free diet. But the columns may be useful to families that have those food issues. Tue May 19 11:45:38 -0700 2009 4686532 126235 NYCkaren 1 4683875 Gotta love the title of the memoir "Born Round: the Secret History of a Full-Time Eater" If that doesn't describe most of us chowhound members I would be surprised. Thu May 14 11:58:12 -0700 2009 4683820 216123 folprivate 1 4684149 huh. wonder who the successor will be. Thu May 14 13:03:55 -0700 2009 4683820 46030 soupkitten 2 4684833 With bottom lines defined by red ink and not the impression a food critic makes on a chair, consider the possibility that the successor won't be anyone. Thu May 14 16:23:18 -0700 2009 4684149 79896 shallots 3 4685991 Or they can jump the shark and get someone "edgy", whose idea of fine dining is to go to a strip mall with a bodacious skateboard park. Fri May 15 05:32:56 -0700 2009 4684833 11826 Phaedrus 4 4686341 Good point, Phaedrus. I'm so far from NYC that I haven't a clue as to whether NYT will (hate the use of this word) repurpose itself to try to reach the younger demographic who only read on line if at all. And it's not a decision I'd want to make, but has anyone heard some say, seriously, that they'll drop their NYT subscription because of Bruni's departure? Fri May 15 07:45:44 -0700 2009 4685991 79896 shallots 5 4686423 1. There is no doubt in my mind that the NYT will hire another reviewer. 2. And not an "edgy," one, either. A top person poached from another publication (I'm a fan of Moira Hodgson), or someone promoted from inhouse (I would like it to be William Grimes or Eric Asimov, but it probably won't be). 3. Bruni wasn't fired. He's just leaving his post as restaurant reviewer. He'll still write for the Times. So why would anyone cancel a subscription? To protest what, exactly? Fri May 15 08:12:52 -0700 2009 4686341 13722 small h 6 4686453 Bruni was good but not the kind of writer who inspires passion in anyone, especially the kind of passion to cancel a subscription. There are a couple of good writers on the food pages now who I wouldn't mind stepping into the spot, but Asimov isn't one of them. Bittman is a very good writer with a strong voice and I appreciate his willingness to step away from the "Bacon and offal are god" altar. Fri May 15 08:20:11 -0700 2009 4686423 100412 newhavener07 7 4686478 Personally, I hope they go for a wild card who will make the reviews more than just service journalism for the tiny slice of readers who can afford top foie gras palaces. I'd love to see it go national, to reflect the readership. Perhaps three weeks of the month in the NYC area (including NJ, LI and CT!) and one week anywhere in the U.S. Plus a strong writer with a unique voice who's not afraid to take on some sacred cows. Fri May 15 08:25:17 -0700 2009 4686453 100412 newhavener07 6 4686467 Being a devil's advocate here. let us not forget that NYT was in the news recently as the owner of the Boston Globe and played hard ball to get the unions to agree to contract changes so that the Globe can remain in business. NYT as a corporate entity is hurting financially. So, putting that into the mix, I would not be surprized to hear that they have hired someone completely unknown (cheaper), to get at the younger demographics and probably make their job more aligned to the web side of the NYT rather than the traditional fish wrapper side. Fri May 15 08:22:37 -0700 2009 4686423 11826 Phaedrus 7 4686504 Actually, I would argue that this is not a time they want to be bringing on more people so they'll go in-house. But that's still a major pool of talent worldwide of all ages. Fri May 15 08:33:48 -0700 2009 4686467 100412 newhavener07 6 4687724 Grimes had the gig before Bruni, no? Was it interim? I believe both brought a non-traditional edge to their reportage... Bruni came after being a Rome correspondent. I like Bittman but the PBS Spain special was unwatchable due to the egos involved. Smartest move would to bring someone in from LA or Chicago or better yet Asia. Locally, why not Sietsema? Fri May 15 14:50:45 -0700 2009 4686423 73175 Flaco 7 4688007 Yes, I believe Grimes was a placeholder, after Reichl? Miller? I forget. Sietsema is great, but he'd have to fancy up quite a bit for the Times, and then maybe he wouldn't be as great. His strong suit, "I rode the D train all the way to the end and someone was roasting pigeons on a spit over a bonfire - they were awesome!" might not be a good fit for those top-foie-gras-palace fans mentioned above. Fri May 15 16:51:34 -0700 2009 4687724 13722 small h 8 4689774 William Grimes wasn't just a placeholder, he was the chief restaurant critic from 2000 to 2004. He succeeded Reichl after a search (another in-house find), and when he decided to leave, they eventually recruited Bruni, who was then Rome bureau chief. Sat May 16 13:21:21 -0700 2009 4688007 10074 Caitlin McGrath 9 4690004 I stand corrected. I thought Grimes wrote reviews for only a year or so. Now I mostly associate him with that chicken in Queens. Sat May 16 15:20:48 -0700 2009 4689774 13722 small h 10 4690041 That chicken story he spun into a book may have been more memorable than his reviews! [grin] Sat May 16 15:36:33 -0700 2009 4690004 10074 Caitlin McGrath 3 4689994 I agree with shallots. Their print circulation is declining steadily and they're deep in debt. The Times is putting more emphasis on their online presence and syndication, so they can drop the heavy reviews of NYC eating establishments. Their food articles are suitable for the new direction and some of those can be done by freelancers and guest contributors which cuts their costs. Sat May 16 15:15:07 -0700 2009 4684833 32444 MakingSense 4 4697694 Every publication in the world is putting more emphasis on its on-line presence. It's the only way they can think to try to survive. Tue May 19 11:41:29 -0700 2009 4689994 126235 NYCkaren 4 4697820 The Times has published food articles for the 4ish decades I've been reading it, so I'm not sure what you mean by "the new direction." What's new(ish) is the Times' food blogs, but they are written primarily by full-timers, not freelancers. And it's not like all of a sudden the Times is available to all & sundry, because it's online. The print edition - with those New York restaurant reviews - is sold all over the world, and has been as long as I can remember. Tue May 19 12:21:56 -0700 2009 4689994 13722 small h 5 4698386 NYT has an online readership of close to 10 million and their print circulation never reached anything close to that. They're well under a million and sinking fast. Their food articles are now less geared to the residents of Manhattan and more toward food in general to appeal to that broad online audience. Blogs can be specialized for local consumption to compete with Gothamist or whatever, but they're not going to get the wide interest that the main food articles will attract. Like other outlets, NYT still hasn't cracked how to make online pay the bills. Tue May 19 15:13:24 -0700 2009 4697820 32444 MakingSense 6 4698564 This is true: <Like other outlets, NYT still hasn't cracked how to make online pay the bills.> This is less true: <NYT has an online readership of close to 10 million and their print circulation never reached anything close to that. They're well under a million and sinking fast.> According to The Atlantic, the site "boasted an impressive 20 million unique users for the month of October, making it the fifth-ranked news site on the Internet in terms of total visitors..." http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200901/new-york-times Here are some circulation figures. Neither "well under a million" nor "sinking fast": http://nytco.com/investors/financials/nyt-circulation.html And if you have any examples of this: <Their food articles are now less geared to the residents of Manhattan and more toward food in general to appeal to that broad online audience.> I'd love to see them. Because I think you just made it up. That the food blogs CAN be specialized for local consumption is immaterial, I think. They aren't. Everyone who logs on sees the same food blogs. Tue May 19 16:22:13 -0700 2009 4698386 13722 small h 7 4699261 Last week's top six stories were about grilling over wood (illegal in NYC,) sriracha, ginger ale, complex American wines, and then two with NYC angles: a steakhouse in Greenwich Village and a program to be held this Fall about French Bistro Cooking. That's 2/3 of them that have general appeal and nothing specific about NYC. The Bruni article about the GV steakhouse was the 9th most popular article behind other food articles including some food- or fashion-related ones that had appeared in the business or other sections of the paper. "Unique users" and "total visitors" can be ONE-time hits, not regular consumers of online content. They are no indication of the number of people who check the food content. NOTE: your source gave figures for October, 2008, with the caveat that they were no doubt driven by the election. The food section is published one day a week with additional material in the Sunday Magazine so it would only account for a small proportion of the online audience even if every reader actually went to the food content. Just because the food blogs can be accessed through the website does not indicate that the online readership bothers to read them. That is unlikely for the majority those who refer to the NYT for financial, political, international, etc. news. From the Huffington Post, "The New York Times, the No. 3 paper, [behind USA Today and the Wall Street Journal both of which gained circulation] fell 3.9 percent in the six months ending in March, according to the Audit Bureau of Circulations." http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2008/04/28/emnew-york-timesem-circul_n_98991.html I was incorrect about the print circulation figure: "The New York Times Co.'s flagship paper remained the third-largest with circulation of 1,077,256, down 3.9 percent from the same period a year earlier." Tue May 19 20:43:48 -0700 2009 4698564 32444 MakingSense 8 4699937 My 2nd favorite morning is Wednesday, when I get the Dining section delivered to my door. (The first is Saturday morning, when I get the Sunday puzzle). I'll be a NYT print subscriber until the end, and hope that my end will come before that of The Gray Lady. Wed May 20 06:56:16 -0700 2009 4699261 10985 MMRuth 9 4704956 Oh MMRuth I'm with you! I hate when we are out of town and can't get the Sunday puzzle. Ruins my whole weekend! My 2nd favorite is the Connecticut section,reading through it, waiting to get to the last page where the restaurant reviews are. Sadly I just found out that last weekend was the LAST of the CT section. And wednesday is 3rd favorite. If desperate I will read stuff on-line but I don't enjoy the experience. Thu May 21 16:46:57 -0700 2009 4699937 142362 sibeats 8 4699992 I'm officially sick of debating this (as you probably are). But it isn't useful to point to one dining section as "proof" that the Times is becoming less NYC-centric, since you don't offer any comparison to an older issue. So just for fun, I checked out the food articles from 5/17/89 - 20 years ago, presumably long before the internet began affecting the Times' content. Here's what I found: an article on chefs of the Northwest, a guide to new food trends, Pierre Freney's bouillabaisse recipe, the "At the Nation's Table" column (remember that?), an article on a Chicago steakhouse that lets customers cook their own, FloFab's "Food Notes", an article on Seattle oysters, and two wine articles I wouldn't categorize even ONE of these as specific to NYC (although Food Notes does tell you that Grace's Marketplace stocks Plugra butter, so that, maybe). To be fair, the restaurant reviews at that time were in Friday's paper, and those certainly would be specific to NYC. Here's a link to the search result so that you can see for yourself: http://query.nytimes.com/search/query?query=&n=10&dp=0&sort=newest&daterange=period&srcht=a&year1=1989&mon1=05&day1=17&year2=1989&mon2=05&day2=17&d=nytdsection%2b&o=e%2b&v=Home%20and%20Garden%2b&c=a%2b Had you read the article on grilling over wood, you would have seen that a major portion of it concerned a guy who grills over wood in his backyard in Cobble Hill. That's in Brooklyn, which is part of NYC. Wed May 20 07:11:51 -0700 2009 4699261 13722 small h 9 4700113 Re: the NYC-centric point, isn't the NYT considered a national paper? Wed May 20 07:45:48 -0700 2009 4699992 10985 MMRuth 10 4700150 I would say international, even. And has been since I can remember. That's why I'm confused by the assertion that it's changing, recently and due to online competition, to appeal to a wider audience, as Making Sense keeps insisting. Wed May 20 07:53:34 -0700 2009 4700113 13722 small h 11 4700311 Agreed. Wed May 20 08:36:40 -0700 2009 4700150 10985 MMRuth 9 4700907 I'm in no way denying that the NYT has held an influential role. Why would 1989 be any different from any other year? Craig Claiborne's 1961 NYT Cookbook is still one of my most-used and it is a compilation of Times recipes from the 1950s. A real classic. Recipes from everywhere in the US and abroad. He did one of the great early Chinese cookbooks for US cooks with Virginia Lee and followup editions of the NYT Cookbook. Their food section has always looked outward. No big surprise - especially when they were about the only cosmopolitan, sophisticated source in the US. We all looked to them for inspiration and education. Now they have competetition at every turn of the cable channel and click of the mouse. Apple probably has an ap for that. The NYT is reacting to that. They are also strapped for cash and putting their money into the sections of their operation that attract the largest audiences - news and analysis. The NYT possibly provides a unique voice in those areas for their readership. They are first and foremost NOT a food publication. They know which articles are attracting the most traffic on the website and that's how they decide where to allocate scarce resources. Wed May 20 11:16:37 -0700 2009 4699992 32444 MakingSense 10 4700976 What you're doing here is moving the goalposts in the middle of the game. You said this: "Their food articles are suitable for the new direction." And I said, what new direction? And you said: "Their food articles are now less geared to the residents of Manhattan and more toward food in general..." i.e., that the NYT used to be more geared to the residents of Manhattan than it is now. So I provided an example of how, 20 years ago, why no, the NYT was not particularly geared to the residents of Manhattan. It was geared toward food in general, just as it is now. Whether the Times is influential (we agree that it is) or whether it is first and foremost a food publication (we agree that it is not) have nothing whatsoever to do with the above. Wed May 20 11:36:15 -0700 2009 4700907 13722 small h 11 4701075 It's really two papers M-F and then Sunday. Anybody else hate that ad promoting the weekend subscription? The incorporation of the Metro section into the front section has been a disaster. The boroughs are generally ignored and/or patronized. That said, the Wednesday Dining section is consistently one of the best features of the Times... long may it run. Wed May 20 12:00:58 -0700 2009 4700976 73175 Flaco 1 4689827 I really liked Sietsema when I lived in the Seattle area. (donkey's years ago) I'd love to see him move to the Times and give the what-for to the belly and offal set. Please! Enough already. I like bacon and sausage as much as the next Texan, but ears, snouts and jowls are for flavoring, imho, not to take center stage/plate. Maybe that's just the beef lover in me talking. Sat May 16 13:41:51 -0700 2009 4683820 12094 amazinc 2 4690869 They're talking about Robert Sietsema (Village Voice), not Tom Sietsema (Washington Post, formerly Seattle P-I). Sun May 17 04:26:04 -0700 2009 4689827 10496 squid kun 1 4920498 Hooray. The worst NYT food writer in ages (which is saying something, given Hesser). An insipid mix of uninsightful, unentertaining and self-admiring conveyed in leaden prose. No surprise he was long the object of a parody blog. He made Grimes's departure doubly disappointing. Here's hoping Sifton's arrival makes his departure a double cause for joy. Wed Aug 05 13:42:31 -0700 2009 4683820 10520 carswell 2 4920666 Jeffrey Chodorow, is that you? Wed Aug 05 14:21:27 -0700 2009 4920498 13722 small h