Comments on: Case Study in How Hockey Can Be Covered: This Week's Washington Times

By: odessa steps magazin

odessa steps magazin — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 21:32:05 +0000

I think the Post sports section is just a shell of its former self.
The two times I bought the paper in the last couple weeks, the sports section was 6 pages. And that’s in the middle of MLB playoffs, football and NHL/NBA training camps.
Like lots of folks here, I just can’t justify good Caps coverage for supporing that paper.

By: Capitals Kremlin

Capitals Kremlin — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:06:42 +0000

I mean beat Reporter….lol

By: Capitals Kremlin

Capitals Kremlin — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 20:05:53 +0000

Hey guys. A little while ago I ran a piece about supporting your beat blogger. This is a perfect example of when e-mailing the editors is a great idea. Let the Times know you loved their season opening coverage, and let the Post know how disappointed you were. If you think your voice won’t go a long way, you’d be surprised.

By: Tyler

Tyler — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 19:55:50 +0000

With the Redskins 4-1 it’s a little suprising that the Caps are getting this much coverage. I’d figure the Redskins would be most the talk around town.

By: exwhaler

exwhaler — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 18:53:00 +0000

>>”the problem is that the Times is politically a conservative publication in a mostly liberal metro region and I get the sense that a lot of people can‚Äôt bring themselves to be seen buying the paper.”
Well, it’s also that the Times was founded and is owned by Sun Myung Moon and his Unification Church. Many people–including conservatives–don’t like the idea of sending money the Moonies’ way.
“The Washington Times will become the instrument in spreading the truth about God to the world.”–Rev. Moon in 2002. How did he know about Ovechkin then?

By: Chimaera

Chimaera — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 18:52:06 +0000

I read both online. But I couldn’t justify ordering the Reverend’s paper.

By: Paul

Paul — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 17:35:56 +0000

The Post is an arrogant newspaper. Too bad there isnt a credible competitor…they would be toast. But for Caps coverage…the Times is a fine alternative for me. My 50cents a day during hockey season goes to the Times. I can read Tarik just fine online.
Tarik is good but Corey has more savvy editors.

By: macvechkin, fka jr

macvechkin, fka jr — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:15:44 +0000

Smart play by the WT. With print dying as it is, you need a clear differentiator. Better to hook up to the Ovie train than the Buzzards and Nasty-Nats. Now if we could just get some of the liberals to read the rest of the paper.

By: Capital Fanatic

Capital Fanatic — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 16:14:36 +0000

Wow, that’s some good stuff. Looks like I’ll have to switch my subscriptions. Just imagine what the coverage could be like in April if all goes well.

By: usiel

usiel — Fri, 10 Oct 2008 15:40:19 +0000

I’ve always liked the times for sports coverage but naturally avoid anything else on the Moony newspaper.