This is the end?

I read today that the San Francisco Chronicle is discontinuing it's weekly food section. Is that right? The LA Times (my old hometown rag) folded it into a stupid Saturday "lifestyle" section and it's now only four pages. Even though I contribute to on-line publications, d*****, I still love holding that newsprint in my hand. But I'm surprised that SF, even with a crappy daily newspaper like the "Commical" would drop it's food section completely. Is this for real?

  • Posted by: pierino
  • November 13, 2013


ChefOno November 15, 2013

Thank you, Cynthia, for that reminder of days gone by and the fight between evening papers and morning editions, for which has the advantage in "scooping" the other. The battle lines have shifted.

Dymnyno: A tip of the hat to a pioneer.

Pierino: Well stirred.

dymnyno November 14, 2013
Having a history with a major newspaper, I am indeed sad at the demise of the printed page. I was an employee at a time when women were a new idea and we joined the "good old boys " network which involved martinis every Friday payday at the bar across the street.
pierino November 15, 2013
dymnyno, I think of the Chron in the same way I think of The Onion. Now, "Kim Jong Un, Sexiest Man in the World" could easily be a headline with the Chron. And people would read it and believe it and not get the joke. That's what I mean about "provincial".
marialissio November 14, 2013
Pierino I'm afraid your days of daily holding any newspaper in your hands are dwindling. All news will be on-line very soon. Alas.
hotstuff101 November 14, 2013
I note, as many others must note, that when Pierino goes on one of his rants his other avatars come to join him (the choir chirps away). So blinking obvious and not very clever.
dymnyno November 14, 2013
Pierino, if you also have an online subscription, you can read the NYT food section online before Wednesday. Online news rules.
mensaque November 15, 2013
Sorry,Hotstuff101,but if anything here sounds like unnecessary rant,is your answer.And somewhat disrespectful too.

Voted the Best Reply!

boulangere November 14, 2013
I congratulated myself every single day that I live there for the fact that I lived there at that point in my life and loved every day of it. And I love that the Sunday paper was available for purchase on Saturday afternoon, something my husband found a sacrilege. He couldn't believe that the Sunday paper on Saturday held all the news that it needed, as though by resting in stands overnight, it would somehow absorb more events. He is gone, and so are those days. But I'm so very glad to have had them.
dymnyno November 14, 2013
The Sunday paper on Saturday is called preprints...just like the magazine and anything that isn't immediate news. All newspapers do it.
dymnyno November 14, 2013
The Sunday paper on Saturday is called preprints...just like the magazine and anything that isn't immediate news. All newspapers do it.
pierino November 14, 2013
dymnyno, you have it exactly right. Newsprint no longer exists to report the news in a 24 news cycle. It does provide the back story though and that's what's important, reflective journalism. Why the Food/Dining sections are getting dumped in the toilet of "Life Style" makes no sense to me. I'm just glad that I can still buy the New York Times on a Wednesday and then read through 8 pages of interesting stuff about food.
Soozll November 14, 2013
Pierino, San Francisco has never tried to be New York. LA, or DC. It is a small town with some big players that like the eclectic atmosphere that the city by the bay exudes. It's a harbor town, an artist colony, a mini-meca for food, technology, money and the arts. I think the Chron. reflects this. I think it makes sense to reshuffle things a bit.
pierino November 14, 2013
Soozll, I've spent a great deal of time in San Francisco (and on both sides of the Bay). The reason I describe San Franciscans as "provincial" is that their main preoccupation is congratulating themselves that they live in San Francisco. It's myopic and narcissistic. The San Jose Mercury News is actually a much better edited paper. There are plenty of things I love about SF including the Ferry Building and the street cars. But you would have to put a gun to my head to climb on a cable car. What? I'm supposed to pay $5.00 to ride on the outside of a public conveyance?
dymnyno November 14, 2013
Unfortunately whether or not the story is true, it probably portends the future of that section . I once worked at The Oregonian and its sister, The Oregon Journal when they were dailies each with an multiple editions. Now, that once great newspaper(owned by the Newhouses) only publishes a paper edition 3 times a week and the rest is online. I think the Chron is heading down the same path.
mensaque November 14, 2013
I would not worry too much,Pierino!TV did not kill radio,despite e-books there are still bookstores around,and now,even vinyl records are making a come back...
Maedl November 14, 2013
I think many newspapers' food sections have gone downhill in the last decade or so. I used to look forward to Wednesday morning breakfasts when I would devour the Washington Post food section along with my muffins. As the Post began to cut corners, I found myself less interested in their food writing. They even cut out their book review section, which I still think was a huge mistake. I've noticed some improvements in recent months, although I l don't think Jeff Bezos has been there long enough to take credit. It will be interesting to see how it develops. Hope SF hangs on to its section!
ChefOno November 13, 2013

I wonder if you looked up "obfuscation" in Wikipedia, would the Chronicle editor's comments appear as a citation?

A newspaper has been a ritual virtually every day since I learned to read and I'll be one of the last print subscribers on Earth (or die trying). If it weren't against my interests, I'd be amused at how many times I've read laments about the death of the medium while literally on the same page there's a link to additional information, photos, etc. The phrase "digging one's own grave" comes to mind…

pierino November 14, 2013
Indeed, ChefOno. Newsprint is a quotidian habit for me as well (USA Today doesn't count). The Chron has become a parody of itself. It was never that great to begin with. Like the city of San Francisco itself it's incredibly provincial. They only have field reporters for local stories---everything else comes off the wires. Ask yourself when was the last time the SF Chronicle won a Pulitzer. Possibly Herb Caen did, I don't know. The LA Times used to win 6 or 7 a year under the Chandlers but they've staggered also. You would think that a city that prides itself (justifiably) on its food scene would hold to that Wednesday tradition. Not the Commical.
ChefOno November 14, 2013

Ah, yes, those were the days…Good old "Don't call it Frisco" Herb…Writing of hippies and beatniks in neighboring Berserkeley…Baghdad by the Bay no longer…A better day for sure…
Greenstuff November 13, 2013
His source was pretty good, the New York Times. Here's the SF Chronicle response
acookswords November 13, 2013
Can you give a link to your source of information, Pierino?
pierino November 13, 2013
This is what I read this morning Folding it into a "Life Style" section is what the L.A. Times did. I can't attest to accuracy but Wednesdays, at lunch without a newspaper in my hand is pretty hard to bear.
Greenstuff November 13, 2013
Just heard on the news that the story is false. Sure hope so.
boulangere November 13, 2013
Something isn't paying its own way, evidently. I love the Chronicle, and will continue to read it online, as I read it for much more than its food section, which has been flagging over the past year or so. Michael Bauer is getting a little too "same old same old," and print restaurant reviews aren't what they used to be. The Chron has been decreasing its recipe content consistently, so the demise can't be entirely unanticipated. Unfortunate? Sure. But not surprising. Denigrate it as you wish, but survival is the word of the day for many print media any more.
Recommended by Food52