Post User Polls

Washington Times cuts staff

The Washington Times, which gained a strong foothold in a politically obsessed city as a conservative alternative to much of the mainstream media, is about to become a drastically smaller newspaper.

Nearly three decades after its founding by officials of the Unification Church, the Times said Wednesday it is laying off at least 40 percent of its staff and shifting mainly to free distribution.

In what amounts to a bid for survival, the company said the print edition will focus on its core strengths: politics, national security, investigative reporting and "cultural coverage based on traditional values." That means the Times will end its run as a full-service newspaper, slashing its coverage of local news, sports and features. Read more.

By Jodi Westrick  |  December 3, 2009; 10:31 AM ET  | Category:  Local Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   StumbleUpon   Technorati  
Previous: Woods still a role model? | Next: Will you miss Tai Shan?


Please email us to report offensive comments.

The Moonies are pulling back because their revenues are down. I wonder if that will be covered in the Washington Times?

Posted by: LeeH1 | December 3, 2009 12:46 PM

I'm confused. The Examiner includes some local news and sports, has a conservative slant, and it's free. I love reading it in the morning. Why should I pay for the new Times?

Posted by: JoeSchmoe06 | December 3, 2009 2:23 PM

The Washington Times never operated at a profit. It was always conservative and known for its opinions, but once in a while it could break news. Not just scoop news the other media would eventually publish, but report on stuff that was not fit to print in establishment newspapers like the Washington Post. That's often been the case though. Even when a newspaper is run by an idealogical organization, like a South Korean Christian Church, it can still upset the apple cart in ways that benefit the public. Let's hope the Times continues to confound the status quo, regardless of how it is distributed.

Posted by: blasmaic | December 3, 2009 3:14 PM

I miss the Washington Star. I won't miss the Washington Times.

Posted by: truamerican | December 3, 2009 3:37 PM

Missing the Moonie paper? Please. It was newsprints' Fox.

Posted by: m_richert | December 3, 2009 3:52 PM

Is that paper still around? Are the Moonies still around. How last century.

Posted by: Fate1 | December 3, 2009 4:26 PM

The Washington Times is a the equivalent of a pint-flask of bourbon for right-wing nutjobs in the Washington area. It helps them feel all light and sleazy, warm and hateful.

It will still serve that function for its addicts. They only cut Sports, Metro, News and all that other unimportant stuff. But they still serve up good old 90-proof ignorance, superstition and lies. No real change at all.

Posted by: bigbrother1 | December 3, 2009 5:51 PM

The Washington Times is a lying rag even by the extremely low standards of rightwing journalism. The former rightwing journalist David Brock reported that while he worked at the Times, he was never, ever factchecked. As long as the hate was dished out, the truth was always incidental.

Posted by: katn1084 | December 3, 2009 10:36 PM

I miss the Star too. I won't miss the Times. The Post is doing a good job with both sides of the political fence, for all people want to claim otherwise. I like it because I get to disagree with some of their writers here too. Sometimes they listen to me too, and that's interesting to me because I can have an impact on civil discourse directly here.

The weird thing about the Times is how it's previous conservative political model has changed from under their feet.

In all this time, no one has been able to accuse the Times of bad intentions towards others. That says something about their Church too that's important to take heed of now especially...

The Times may well reinvent itself as a different sort of 'conservative voice' than it has been. Perhaps they can seek counsel from some of the retired GOP leaders on that and do something different than other news outlets.

The party they've been most closely associated with is in trouble now, so there's opportunity for them that they have not had in the past.

Posted by: Nymous | December 3, 2009 10:43 PM

The Washington Times is Fox News in print. I never saw such angry news until I read the Times. At least you can get both sides with the Post.

Posted by: Rax359 | December 4, 2009 12:59 AM

I'll miss their sports coverage, which has served as an compliment to the Post's coverage. And that's about it.

Posted by: RedBirdie | December 4, 2009 1:24 AM

Gee, the Post never put up such a poll about the NYT's cutbacks.

I guess the Post was just looking to provide a forum for liberals to bash a conservative news outlet. Mission accomplished.

Posted by: bobmoses | December 4, 2009 7:06 AM

I am more saddened by the 72% (as of right now)of the people who are not disturbed about the passing of yet another newspaper. I was not a reader of the Times and I believe the paper to be nearly comical. However, I do realize the importance of the print media and morn its demise. All thoughtful people should.

Posted by: Albie1 | December 4, 2009 7:32 AM

The loss of the Washington Times will only missed by the fish that it serves as a suitable wrapping.

Posted by: mentat99 | December 4, 2009 9:21 AM

That rag should disappear entirely or just go to South Korea and stay there.

Posted by: truth1 | December 4, 2009 10:01 AM

The comments to this entry are closed.

RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2011 The Washington Post Company