Comments on The Times’ New Format

I think the format changes in your newspaper are wonderful. I always thought it was a waste of space to print all those useless stories. Who has time to read? I think your people in marketing should be commended. However, someone must have slipped up. In your Oct. 12, edition only 24 of the 30 pages in Part A had a ratio of almost 75% advertising to 25% news. Let’s increase the ads on the remaining six pages, guys.

Seriously, redundancy is the first word that comes to mind. Waste. Why show stories in Section A in The Top of Today’s News then recap them again in the Highlights spot of the individual sections? Why highlight on Page 1 of each section the stories that are on Page 1 of each section?

Why make readers search through Section A for the In Brief articles of the world, the nation, California? They were previously perfectly placed on Page 2.

I don’t even care for the TV ad showing how one can find everything quickly in the new format. One does not video-ize a newspaper. A newspaper is to be read at leisure.

ROBERT GALLEGOS

Alhambra