Good link, TW, but once again, we already know that the print circulation of all newspapers is declining. Given the jump in online viewers, I just can't bring myself to assume that the Times is dead, dying, or significantly worse off than most major papers. Based on figures in your own
link.
Go back and look at your own link once more. Sure, MediaWeek cites a big drop for circulation of the Sunday NYT edition, but the drop in daily circulation is 3.8 %, as opposed to the 9.2 drop for the Sunday edition.
How to explain the Sunday numbers. Try this on for size: "According to New York Times spokeswoman Diane McNulty, the company had budgeted for the declines in Sunday and daily circulation. Two-thirds of the Sunday loss stemmed from the elimination of bonus days and third-party bulk copies. Also: the paper had a single copy and home delivery price increase in July. The paper also focused on growing "highly profitable circulation," she noted."
The same article cites declines in the conservative New York Post of "over 3 percent daily and more than 8 percent on Sunday." So this rightie news rag really doesn't look much better, does it? In fact trying to compare the changes in circulation (both daily and Sunday editions) for most of the papers in the story doesn't appear to me to show any patterns that match the paper's political orientations.
Finally, let's note that changes in circulation of the Sunday NY Times don't correlate to overall changes in subscribers for the newspaper. Typical NeoCon games with numbers. You just might want to go back and check out that jump in the NY Times online readership. Next thing you know, Tumbleweed, you and Wubbya are going to be telling us that gasoline prices are high because oil is high. More indisputable numbers with no information content.