Readers are writing in today to ask why they don’t see Candorville in the LA Times. They also note that La Cucaracha and Mallard Fillmore have been dropped. Honestly, I don’t know what’s going on and neither does my syndicate. We weren’t informed of any change in status, and usually when papers make such a change, they do us the courtesy of informing us beforehand. If you’d like an answer today, or want to talk them out of whatever madness is going on, you’re going to have to contact The Times directly.
-
admin in Uncategorized
What’s going on with the LA Times?
Related Post
View Comments (18)
You're right, I should have thought of JUMP START, which is funny but "safe."
I thought it might have been personalized since I specifically mentioned PEANUTS, whose author has been dead for years and they're all reruns. But I guess enough other people made the comparison that it's part of the form letter.
Yeah, that's word for word the same response I got back. I knew it was a form letter 'cause my e-mail wasn't "thoughtful" (all I said was "Where the heck is Candorville?").
Maybe it's a good sign. Maybe it means they're getting too many letters to respond personally, so this Sherry Stern has a text file sitting on her desktop she cuts and pastes. Keep writing, peeps, she'll get tired of cutting & pasting yet.
Man, this is the worst move I've seen by the Times yet, and I had to suffer through their "enhancements" to the opinion page (which really meant getting rid of their most provocative parts, Robert Scheer & Mike Ramirez).
The paper's gotten so lame now that with C-Ville gone, I have no real reason to subscribe anymore.
Oh, they do have another strip by an African-American cartoonist, that's "Jump Start." Not bad, it's harmless family humor. Just not my cup of tea.
I received the following response from Sherry Stern. I'd be interested in knowing if other people who wrote received the same response, or if it's a form letter.
"Thanks for writing. We made some changes to our pages and in the process had to drop about half a dozen comics. It's never easy to do that because every comic has its own following and the most loyal fans inevitably are disappointed when their favorite is pulled. (Believe it or not, in our recent comics surveys, Peanuts is tops among all demographics.)
I appreciate your thoughtful letter and hope you can enjoy the rest of the Los Angeles Times, including other comics on our pages.
Sincerely,
Sherry Stern
Deputy Editor, Features
Los Angeles Times
By the way, is there another comic strip in the LA TIMES that is drawn by an African-American artist?
Thanks, anonymous. If you'd like to see Candorville back in the Times (they already reinstated La Cucaracha), you might try writing to them (the link's at the top of the blog) or calling and letting them know. There's still a slim chance they'll change their minds.
There's also a growing chance the surrounding papers (the Daily News & the rest of the LA Newspaper Group) may add it, so if you'd like to see it there if the Times doesn't reconsider, a note would help.
I'm not sure what the Times is thinking. You don't alienate your young adult readership in order to make room for more kids' stuff. Young adults aren't going to buy the paper just for their kids, not when there are so many other sources of entertainment for children. They will buy it if there's a lot in there for them, too.
When I opened the LA Times and saw that both Candorville and La Cucaracha had disappeared, all I could think of was, "What's with this white wash?"
P.S. I say this as someone who's about as WASP as you can get!
First they broke the comics into two sections: the "family friendly" vanilla strips and the political/edgy/grown up strips. Now, they removed two of the most creative and edgy strips from the ADULT section to make room for "kids reading?" Something stinks!
Send a message to the LA Times comic editor:
Sherry Stern
Deputy Editor, Features
Los Angeles Times , 202 W. First St.
Los Angeles, CA 90012
Prickly City came back to replace Mallard Fillmore. Pink Panther that really sucks replaced one of the good ones.
It's obvious that the editors of the TIMES doesn't understand satire. Of course, idiots are everywhere, and you can't beat them. Why? Because they are just too stupid to realize that they CAN be beaten. It gives them a cloak of invincibility, a S*** proof, bullet-proof style of armor.
If the TIMES is a public, shareholder owned company, buy their stock, and vote the editors out!!
Darrin--I say "Good Luck", and I don't mean it in a sarcastic way. If I lived in LA, I'd be pounding on the editor's door.
What could they drop instead of Candorville? There are SO MANY choices. They could drop Marmaduke, Blondie, any one of their million comics whose creators have left, or they could drop the comic strip that's been in reruns since its creator DIED 7 years ago.
Peanuts is great, but its time has passed. Bring back Candorville!
I wrote the LA Times to protest and cancel my subscription. I find it fascinating that so many wrote the Times to protest cancelling "La Cucaracha" that it was restored, at the cost of "Heathcliff". Let's see if "Candorville" is restored. Wanna bet?
Paul's right, it's not just a local issue anymore. Papers are watching other papers for ways to increase their profitability. If the LA Times cuts quality comics to save a LITTLE money and doesn't face a shit storm, papers all over the country are going to do the same thing.
Readers have to speak out, wherever they're from, when faced with an industry-wide trend like this one. ESPECIALLY when it's a national newspaper like the LA Times. I live in Maryland, and I read the Times. It's in libraries all across the country even where it isn't in newsracks.