Everyone is gone at the Washington Post... Almost no Metro section left...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree but honestly Paula Dvorvak was pretty awful.

You are sock puppeting now?

We get it. You don’t like her. You say this every time her name comes up in these forums and it’s quite tiresome.

lol. Who are you talking to? This is the first time I’ve posted about her but I can absolutely see why I’m not alone. She’s awful. Now I’m curious to see who else agrees with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree but honestly Paula Dvorvak was pretty awful.

You are sock puppeting now?

We get it. You don’t like her. You say this every time her name comes up in these forums and it’s quite tiresome.

Multiple posters. Glad she’ll have one less platform.

Nice try. Lovely parting gifts for you off stage, etc. We know you're one person. You literally say the same thing every time her name comes up in these forums. I've seen it for years. It's like you have an obsession. It's weird.

Dude. This is not a single poster. The lady is an idiot and a horrific “ reporter.” Clearly you can accept that more than one person thinks this and posts in DCUM, right?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:They became a one trick pony like NPR. Everything was "black, black, black, gay, gay, gay, trans, trans, trans..."

And they wonder why the subscriptions plummeted. Turns out there just aren't enough gay blacks to keep a paper afloat.

Post leaders proudly proclaimed post-Floyd that they were going to hire identity-focused "journalists" to thread (critical) race and gender throughout each section of the paper. And so they did, it it is now lame, predictable, and unreadable. Yet, I still subscribe to the digital edition to get a frustration dopamine hit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Let that rag die.

This. It used to be a respected paper. Now it’s just regurgitated woke punch lines.

Whatever. You clearly never read it before.

DP. I grew up reading the WaPo. I read it every day until about two years ago, when we finally realized how utterly biased and absurd it is, at which point we canceled our subscription. The PP is correct. There is nothing serious or respectable about the WaPo any longer and it's been that way for some time.

I don't think the Post changed. I think you changed. And obviously I don't know anything about you personally, but everyone I know personally who has this opinion used to read the Washington Post but now watches a lot of Fox.

Sorry, this doesn't apply to me. I don't watch Fox. I've simply recognized the steady and persistent leftward bias of the WaPo over the years, to the point where 99% of the articles revolve around race, gender, sexuality, or other social issues. Even in articles about politics or international news, there is a very obvious liberal slant rather than simply hard news and factual reporting. It's pretty astonishing that you would claim otherwise, but not entirely surprising.
PP

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree but honestly Paula Dvorvak was pretty awful.

You are sock puppeting now?

We get it. You don’t like her. You say this every time her name comes up in these forums and it’s quite tiresome.

DP. I don't like her either. Is that allowed? What's "quite tiresome" is your need to be the forum police.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Good. Let that rag die.

This. It used to be a respected paper. Now it’s just regurgitated woke punch lines.

Sad but true... and the last place I'd go for any local news.

Since local for you is Moscow that’s hardly surprising.

DP. Did you really think this was clever? You just sound so stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The Post had to cut back on spending, but I think they went about it the wrong way. They offered buyouts and guess who took them -- the skilled reporters who can easily get a job elsewhere. Then you're left with a bunch of second stringers.

The second stringers didn't take buyouts because they know they're not easily employable elsewhere. For example, the front page currenty has an article about where they tested if you need to wash your dishes before putting them in the dishwasher -- leave that to Consumer Reports or Mythbusters. Or 13 Tips to make your job less stressful -- leave that to Buzzfeed.

WP should focus on local news, and politics as those are their niche areas where they can excel.

Such a weird take

Most of the really, really good journalists have been out of the industry for 10-15 yrs. Yes, some great ones remained, but the vast majority of the skilled reporters have been gone for awhile. Not just at the Post, but everywhere.

The ones who’ve been hanging on at the Post are ones who either truly cannot imagine another line of work - a life outside of journalism - or have unsuccessfully tried to make a lateral move to another field and it hasn’t worked.

The claim that scores of highly talented people recently left the Post to easily find other jobs in journalism is nuts. There are like four quality journalism jobs left. These people have nowhere to go.

And the buzzfeed-style stuff in WashPo is not because of “second string reporters.” They could send inexperienced interns to cover the white house and supreme court if they wanted. The paper decided they want writers (of any level/talent/experience) writing about dishwashers. So you are getting articles about dishwashers.

True

But WaPo really lost the plot. There are good journalists out there, even young ones.

But WaPo abandoned Metro, Sports, and Style. Their Opinion page is boring and predictable.

There are maybe three national and international correspondents worth paying attention to.
Meanwhile, the NY Times has some great recipes. Good tech stuff. Plus the good reporting.

Much better product. Same with WSJ. And the Financial Times.

WaPo has decided to go very down market.

It's too bad. It was a very good brand not that long ago. But, not interesting these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:So if WaPo goes away as some of you wish, where do you plan to get your local news? Carrier pigeon?

The Post is probably working on a story right now on how carrier pigeons contribute to climate change. With the white pigeons being the worst. And, how Trump has a pet pigeon named Stonewall Jackson. Story at 11.

Nailed it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree but honestly Paula Dvorvak was pretty awful.

You are sock puppeting now?

We get it. You don’t like her. You say this every time her name comes up in these forums and it’s quite tiresome.

lol. Who are you talking to? This is the first time I’ve posted about her but I can absolutely see why I’m not alone. She’s awful. Now I’m curious to see who else agrees with me.

+1
I used to just silently roll my eyes when I would read her stupid columns, but now I see I'm not alone. Looks like she's found this thread and is quite triggered!
DP

[Anonymous]

Taylor Lorenz is hot!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They became a one trick pony like NPR. Everything was "black, black, black, gay, gay, gay, trans, trans, trans..."

And they wonder why the subscriptions plummeted. Turns out there just aren't enough gay blacks to keep a paper afloat.

Post leaders proudly proclaimed post-Floyd that they were going to hire identity-focused "journalists" to thread (critical) race and gender throughout each section of the paper. And so they did, it it is now lame, predictable, and unreadable. Yet, I still subscribe to the digital edition to get a frustration dopamine hit.

DP. Wow, I didn't know this. I wonder if the poster who insists, "it's not them, it's YOU!" is aware of this. So, so glad we got rid of the WaPo before George Floyd.

[Anonymous]

We're actually thinking of ending our subscription and going with the NYT instead of the Washington Post.

Since I have to use the TV stations, Wtop, and The MoCo Show to cobble together local news, I not very impressed any more.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree but honestly Paula Dvorvak was pretty awful.

You are sock puppeting now?

We get it. You don’t like her. You say this every time her name comes up in these forums and it’s quite tiresome.

I'm a DP- Jeff can confirm, but personally I find her so abhorrent that I wouldn't mind it if her car fell off a bridge. She is everything that is wrong with the left.

That is a horrible thing to say and you have serious issues.

NP. Her job was to provoke. That’s it. She contributed nothing to serious journalism though and I doubt anyone at the post expected her to be a real journalist. Maybe she’ll have an opportunity to prove herself at her next gig.

DP. There wasn't anything provocative about Dvorak's columns. She just served up a bunch of predictable, poorly written, liberal comfort food for folks who'd stick a "Hate Has No Home Here" sign in their front yard but obsess about getting their kids into a Big 3 school. Blah.

Perfect summation. My husband and I routinely laughed at her drivel.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We're actually thinking of ending our subscription and going with the NYT instead of the Washington Post.

Since I have to use the TV stations, Wtop, and The MoCo Show to cobble together local news, I not very impressed any more.

I was thinking of NYT or wall street journal. The Post used to be so great .

[Anonymous]

wow - this thread is so timely for me! my last straw with WaPo was seeing this headline two days ago:

Resignation at Harvard latest but not last salvo in GOP war on colleges
Claudine Gay’s resignation as president seen as emblematic by some of political pressure on higher education

because she is a black woman, she did no wrong and is the victim, and it's all the Republicans' fault.