Anyone notice the PI has more focus on the city, while the Times seems to cover the suburbs, especially the Eastside more?
The Times seems to even use the Eastside lingo, for example calling South King Co. “the South End” (in the image on the left), while the PI uses the “South End” like people use it in the city, the way I used it growing up.
Compare the coverage of the growth report this week. The PI:
Seattle’s growth over the past year was the fastest of any year in at least the past four decades, according to new state estimates.
The city grew by 1.3 percent between April 1, 2006, and April 1, 2007, putting the new total at 586,200, according to data the state Office of Financial Management released Wednesday. The growth rate was up from 1 percent the previous year; the rate was the highest of any year in state records since 1968. The closest year was 1992, when the rate was 1.26 percent.
Notice it says “the city” (distinctly Seattle jargon) and starts off talking about Seattle.
The Times on the other hand has an article focused on the Eastside, and an AP wire article that doesn’t mention Seattle until the fifth paragraph. From the Eastside article:
Issaquah takes this year’s title for biggest population jump on the Eastside from 2006 to 2007.
The number of people living in the city spiked by 26 percent in the past year, according to population figures released Wednesday by the state Office of Financial Management. That’s an increase of 5,140 residents, mostly due to a voter-approved annexation of the Greenwood Point/South Cove neighborhood.
Completely different.
The “Eastside” article also says two difference numbers for seattle’s population which is confusing.
I don’t like the “south end” to mean all of south king county. It’s stupid and confusing. I guess that’s why I read the pi.
I get frustrated with both papers often, this week it is the Times. They have been really anti-transit lately. For example one of them yesterday ran a piece about the Mercer Island Park and Ride, and they put a negative spin on it making ST sound like they are wasting our money. When that isn’t the case. The article did say that ST would get the money back plus more. Also, what is with the anti transit ads on the Times? I just don’t get it.
The reason I buy the PI is because it has two crossword puzzles and one of them is the NY Times puzzle.
It’s classier than the LA Times puzzle in the Seattle Times.
I guess no one in Seattle can make a crossword puzzle.