HOME > Chowhound > Food Media & News >


Question for fellow LA Times subscribers

did anyone else receive their paper *without* the Food section today? i called customer service and the man i spoke to said it was probably just an isolated incident, but i figured i'd ask around.

  1. Click to Upload a photo (10 MB limit)
  1. Isn't the Food Section on Thursdays? At least mine has been for quite some time ...

    8 Replies
    1. re: a213b

      ha! forget i said anything - i just started subscribing again after a few years off, and i'm used to the NY Times schedule of special sections..though it does seem strange to me that they still post the features online Weds if the print edition doesn't come until Thurs.

      1. re: goodhealthgourmet

        Just FYI, the print used to be Wednesday until, oh I dunno ... maybe a year or two ago.

        You're welcome to have mine, as it usually takes me no more than 5 minutes to peruse it -- I don't find it to be a particularly strong food section.

        1. re: a213b

          okay, at least i know i'm not crazy - i *thought* it used to be on Wednesdays. of course the guy i spoke to was clueless - he just accepted what i said about it being on Wednesday and said he'd let the delivery person know to include it with my paper tomorrow to make up for it :)

          and yes, i agree it's not very strong - neither is the NYT anymore...but old habits die hard.

          1. re: a213b

            I think the LA Times as a whole has slipped compared to what it was a couple of years ago.

            But, their food section is still one of the best newspaper sections in the country. Its not a murders' row like in its heyday, but you've still got David Karp, the fruit detective, Russ Parsons, C. Nguyen, etc..

            Other than the NY Times, who has a better food section?

            1. re: hobbess

              Well, I don't read every metro area's Food Section, so I cannot speak to who has a better one (though I agree the NYT is better).

              But, truthfully, that's pretty irrelevant to me. Just because most other food sections are mediocre does not mean I should be ok with the LAT being the "least mediocre" of the bunch. And I firmly disagree that the LAT Food section is "one of the best newspaper sections in the country" ... there are many metro "A sections" I would take over the LAT Food.

              I think, as we are seeing with newspapers in general, that there has been a years long slide. I do like Parsons and Thi, but Virbila is a dinosaur who shows me each week why she is such a pedantic and insular "critic".

              Anyway ... I'm not the biggest fan, as you can tell.

              1. re: a213b

                really? i never would have guessed ;)

                i'm with you on SIV. in fact, her review is the least interesting part of it for me, as is Sifton's in the NYT. but certain other contributors - such as those you mentioned - still make it worth reading, IMHO. i hear you though, they've all deteriorated over the past decade. Wednesday used to be my second-favorite newspaper day of the week (Sunday will always rule because of the Magazine), but now it's barely any more fun than the others.

              2. re: hobbess

                The LA Times Food section is in color.

                1. re: hobbess

                  I agree that the paper has come down quite a bit. A number of good writers have been let go and for a while it looked like nobody was proof reading stories, which came out with a splendid array of grammatical errors, malapropisms, and other flaws. Largely due to the leveraged buyout of the Tribune by Sam Zell and cohorts.

                  And I did get my food section today. Slim as it was.

            1. re: monku

              i occasionally read it online anyway, but it just isn't the same as sitting at the table in the morning and turning the pages with a good cup of coffee. plus i spend too much time in front of my computer screen as it is.

              1. re: goodhealthgourmet

                Hey ghg, in case you can't wait for the Thursday paper, I usually find the food section posted on Wednesday online as well - but that's only if you're really itchin' for it... You've probably noticed that this section is a lot thinner than in the past (when it ran on Wednesdays). It does have less content than in the past, but it also has fewer ads - particularly the market ads. Also, if you include the stuff that is only found on the online edition, it's actually quite substantial. And of course, you can find past articles relatively easily as well...

                1. re: bulavinaka

                  thanks - actually a lot of the content gets posted online on Tuesday night, which is when i usually start reading it. that's why i thought something was amiss when the section wasn't in my Weds delivery!

                  yeah, today's was pretty skimpy. i miss the good old days when it was a nice, meaty section, but at least there's extra content online...and it's easier to bookmark or copy & paste the recipes there than to save newspaper scraps :)

                  1. re: goodhealthgourmet

                    Tuesday? Wow - didn't know this - and you are an eager beaver! I think the change from Wednesday to Thursday hard copy distribution was to purposefully coincide with the new ad day for the supers - used to be Wednesday and is now Thursday. I don't shop at the supers much any more though - too many choices out there.

                    1. re: bulavinaka

                      makes perfect sense - i couldn't understand why they made the change. you're right about the supermarkets - i rarely have the need to set foot in the big ones anymore, and i'm amazed at how easy it's been to continue on with my food & cooking life despite my Whole Paycheck boycott.