I found this via an Instapundit link:
"The New York Times (NYT) has to repay $400 million in debt in the first half of 2009. It does not have the money. It plans to mortgage its headquarters, but it is uncertain what that will bring in an uncertain real estate market. The firm's Boston Globe and regional newspaper operations lose money, so they will be hard to sell. NYT is controlled by the Sulzberger family which has super-majority voting shares. That won't matter much when the company runs out of money. Another big media operation, perhaps News Corp (NWS) which owns The Wall Street Journal and The New York Post, will come in and auction off what it can and keep the flagship New York Times newspaper and NYTimes.com website."
It's no mystery that the entire business model of the major print media dissolved during the last several years. However, a few widely read franchises, such as the Wall Street Journal, have hung on by the slimmest of margins and landed in the hands of stronger business partners.
Others, like The New York Times, rushed in where smarter businesmen feared to tread. Ironically (and the irony is truly rich) the Times finds itself in the same company of the bourgeois capitalist mercenary targets that their Style section and Editorial page pilloried for years. Now they find themselves with hat in hand asking for a commercial real estate loan which will most likely not be forthcoming.
This must be enormously embarrassing today for Pinch & Co., especially upon learning that they are more gullible and less agile than Sara Palin.
Smug as it may sound, The Old Gray Lady long ago traded in the requisite humility and respect for truth (a quality that we today would intuitively think of as the DNA of a reputable news organization) for a more metro hip (i.e. Maureen Dowd and Paul Krugman) and shallow editorial content. Their readers recognized this sordid compromise years ago and headed for the turnstiles.