Could the editors at the Los Angeles Times be any more useless? Their newspaper is going down in flames, with cash flow declines ranked worst among the deeply troubled Tribune Company newspapers. Their best hope for salvation is the Web, where the paper is desperately behind upstart competitors like Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood and the Huffington Post. Just last year the paper installed new publishing software that couldn't even handle hyperlinks. And yet newsroom "leaders" just spent 18 months in a fucking (ahem) committee debating what swears LATimes.com bloggers should be allowed to use, and when. The byzantine machinations involved some sort of appeal to a "ruling" of a special committee about some formal guidelines, and of course resulted in a tedious and useless memo that should make anyone who ever cared about the once-great newspaper want to slit his wrists. Its insufferable, self-indulgent stupidity lies after the jump. Oh, and it basically says no one can use "pissed off" because it's crude and might tarnish the LA Times's sterling image in the remaining months before the paper's now-all-but-inevitable collapse.

The magazine industry is facing one of "its worst beatings in years" amid the economic downturn, circulation declines and general print media weakness. The smart, aspiring media mogul heads straight for the internet rather than try to recreate Spy or some other once-esteemed dead-trees publication, as he might have 20 years ago. But that's not to say running a magazine is without its privileges, particularly for an aggressive owner like BlackBook's Ari Horowitz. Horowitz recently made the tabloids for hosting "shoots" and "casting calls" (ahem) for hot young models at his apartment. And now, says an insider, BlackBook staff snickering at Horowitz's Facebook profile were surprised to discover his shameless conquest of a 22-year-old NYU coed. Horowitz, pictured at left with his young flame, is just about 40. Does she do any work for BlackBook? And are there more pictures of her? Find out after the jump!

The National Enquirer is having an amazing week thanks to its coverage of John Edwards' philandering, but the supermarket tabloid is probably still going to die along with troubled parent company American Media Inc., the Times' David Carr reports for tomorrow's paper. It doesn't seem to matter that three of the best papers in the country all ran stories about how the Enquirer was right about Edwards and they were wrong or that the tabloid still owns the probably-not-finished scandal. AMI is so deep in the hole — nearly $1 billion! — that most analysts aren't even keeping track of the Edwards coverage or anything else about the company because they've written it off. One gave this fairly devastating quote to Carr, anonymously:

"A year ago, the conventional wisdom was, 'Yep, there are problems out there, but there’s still significant value.' Now, it’s 'Run away.'" [Times]

After bitter tabloid rivals the Post and Daily News both lost their bidding war for Newsday to bumbling Long Island cable concern Cablevision, discussion centered on which tab would be first to strike some kind of cost-cutting partnership with Cablevision. As it turns out, the Post and Daily News may just cut Cablevision out of the loop entirely — the Times tonight substantiates prior rumors the two papers will partner. The tabloids are in preliminary but "committed" discussions to share printing, distribution, sales and other functions, stopping short of a full Joint Operating Agreement. If only it were all so easy as simply signing off on such a deal.

Someone started an aptly-named site called "One Person Trend Stories," which does a pretty fantastic job of skewering the thinly-sourced, heavily-caveated features familiar to readers (and writers!) of pretty much every major newspaper and newsmagazine out there. It's not clear if the anonymous author — J-school student? Disgruntled intern? — intended the site as a parody, or as more straightforward humor. But it's pretty obvious that bloggers everywhere love the site and are linking to it. To be sure, the only example I have is the post you're now reading. Ahem. One of the better posts is after the jump.

"The editor of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, for example, likened AP President and Chief Executive Tom Curley to the secretary-general of the Politburo at a convention in April... While the AP's 1,500 member newspapers still own the organization... they account for only 27% of AP revenue, down from more than 50% in the mid-1980s." [WSJ]

It's lucky for Russia! magazine that former Gawker and new NYT Magazine covergirl Emily Gould has already split up with Russian-born novelist and n+1 editor Keith Gessen. Otherwise, they'd be in trouble! Out now in their new issue is Gould's profile of Russian-American writers—including Gessen.

"When [the protagonist] makes haste to a downtown sex club, it's no surprise that he spends an inordinate amount of time folding his clothes into neat piles and comparing the claustrophobic buddy booths to the fitting rooms at Bergdorf Goodman." [WWD] (Photo via PhilipGalanes.com)

When News Corp. chairman Rupert Murdoch decided to sit down for a rare, on-camera interview, it was of course with two reporters from his own media empire, Walt Mossberg and Kara Swisher of the Wall Street Journal. In this clip from the Journal's D conference in Carlsbad, California, Murdoch explains how he thinks the Journal and Times will be competing aggressively with one another on all stories — business, political or otherwise — within just "a few months." He also rants about how it's "ridiculous" that an average of 8.3 editors looks at a typical WSJ story, inevitable expanding it beyond reason. "People don't have time for it — there's not a story that you can't get all the facts in (within) half the space." Also: Murdoch confirms he was involved in the Post's decision to switch its allegiance from Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton to Barack Obama.

Doree Shafrir has a bone to pick with Newsweek. The former Gawker editor recently scored a book deal from her blog of mom emails, and now Newsweek is asking whether she or any other blogger can even write books, much less sell them. "Many bloggers just repackage what they've already done," the magazine said, citing Gawker's book as an example. But the Gawker book did not contain any content from the site at all, so it can hardly be called "repackaged." And there are all kinds of other problems with Newsweek's blogger book slam:

Times editors are apparently tired of people saying mean things about Emily Gould and about their own decision to publish her meditation on blogging, because they've shut down the comments section attached to Gould's magazine piece. Some 727 responses flooded in before the shutdown, even though the article won't be physically published until the Sunday issue. Many called the former Gawker editor narcissistic, self-indulgent and a bad writer and said her story was a waste of space; there were supporters, including people who praised Gould for having moved on from vicious, inconsequential Gawker and for pushing them to reexamine their own online personas. Whatever was said, the decision to shut down comments is bizarre, because just yesterday Times Magazine editor Gerry Marzorati told FishbowlNY the story was worthy of his cover precisely because of the discussion it would spark:

Tech blogger Robert Scoble, formerly of Microsoft and now with Fast Company, spent some time hanging out in the Times' research and development division, which exists (really?), and filmed some of their wacky publishing experiments. One innovation, set to go online today, is a browsable interface to the Times' historic back issues, which have been available through search but which can now be viewed as a series of front pages through an interface called Times Machine. More interesting: A prototype newspaper rack with a digital window display and the ability to generate custom versions of the newspaper. Of course, newspaper companies like the Times have been imagining the future for decades, and have jumped in at the earliest stages of most technological leaps, from radio to satellite data transmission to the internet. But they've never known their customers well enough to lead in the application of technology, and it's by no means clear whether the Times can make itself the exception to that rule, geek lab or not. Judge for yourself after watching a video clip of the magic rack after the jump.

Meet Markus Dohle, the new CEO of Random House. His previous job was retooling Bertelsmann AG's printing plants to repair mobile phones, generate billing statements and warehouse pills. In case that's not unglamorous enough on its own, note that Dohle is following in the footsteps of Peter Olson, who while considered a tough-talking bean counter was also a former lawyer and banker fluent in three languages, not to mention a voracious reader. Dohle seems to want to move beyond the rarefied club of literary publishing into more practical, money-making endeavors; according to the Wall Street Journal, which broke news of his appointment this morning citing anonymous sources, he is interested in expanding education services, among other things. Having turned Bertelsmann's publishing division into a "growth engine" and with no obvious emotional attachment to high-minded writing per se, Dohle should be the ruthless numbers man Olson always fancied himself but could never actually become. [WSJ]

Ruthless press baron Rupert Murdoch has concocted two diabolical schemes to ruin the lives of New York tabloid readers and owners forever. First scheme: Murdoch will raise the price of his New York Post — NO! — to fifty cents, with the extra quarter going directly into a special fund for the eradication of all remaining integrity and decency in American media, starting with the Wall Street Journal, which Murdoch has not yet finished burning to the ground forever. Ha ha, just kidding, the extra quarter will just offset the Post's estimated $50 million per year losses, and you will pay it, because it's not like you can just read Page Six on the internet or something. Scheme the second: is classified. This is a secret scheme. But:

Here are two Good Reads, officially crowned as such tonight at the National Magazine Awards: Top feature story "You Have Thousands Of Angels Around You," from Atlanta magazine, is about "how one young woman lost her family, survived a war, escaped two continents, and through the kindness of strangers found a lifelong home in Atlanta." It was also endorsed as "pretty fucking amazing" by commenter lizzybennet. There's also "China's Instant Cities," which won the reporting prize for National Geographic, and is about "the entrepreneurial frenzy behind China's dramatic economic growth." As the Times noted, the award was groundbreaking because the magazine usually wins prizes for its photography. If any of the other winners have thrilled you, feel free to post in the comments (or email tips@gawker.com).

Wired editor Chris Anderson tonight came face-to-face with the "Long Tail," his oft-cited metaphor for low-grade internet fame, via an encounter after the National Magazine Awards with fameball Julia Allison. Star Editor-At-Large Allison worked Anderson hard, no doubt as part of her relentless effort to take the "proto" out of her protocelebrity — to be more than tail, basically. She reports on her blog that she chatted Anderson up for 20 minutes and ended up "bopping him enthusiastically." Wait, Julia. Didn't you just tell the Times you were going to stop using your "pink-encased loaded weapon" this way?? Anyway, alternate photo captions for the picture above are totally welcome after the jump. Even if you're drunk. Especially if you're drunk. [Julia Allison: 1, 2, 3, 4]

Gawker's Hamilton Nolan is at the National Magazine Awards, and notifies us via his Sidekick that Anderson Cooper is there! Someone else emailed us a photo of the adorable silver-haired CNN anchor (left) earlier tonight, looking pretty casual. Oh, also, on a less important note, some awards were given out to various magazines. Hamilton said something about New York's Gawker story, "Everybody Sucks," losing to Atlanta magazine's "You Have Thousands of Angels Around You." Outrage! Everybody sucks!! Anyway, it looks like the full list of winners is up and the only multiple-award winners were National Geographic (three awards) and Vanity Fair (two). Nominated for 12 awards, the New Yorker took home just one, though it was for general excellence, so that's nice. I mean, err, it sucks! Everybody sucks! [National Magazine Awards]

"Cablevision is preparing a $650 million offer for Newsday, $70 million more than bids by Rupert Murdoch and Mortimer B. Zuckerman... Executives... interested in Newsday said they learned over the last month that printing, trucking and subscription operations were more troubled and inefficient than they knew. Paradoxically, that has persuaded them that the paper was worth more... 'These are problems that can be fixed, so there's a lot of room for improvement,' one executive said." [Times]

The newest reports on Marcus Brauchli's departure from the Wall Street Journal offer a fresh list of slights inflicted on the outgoing managing editor by Rupert Murdoch and his lieutenants, beyond that time the News Corp. chairman forgot to call on Brauchli during an introductory speech to Journal staff. Murdoch and his men also kept Brauchli in the dark about Project Eagle, the Journal's British edition, until one week prior to launch, when Brauchli reportedly discovered it at a New Jersey printing plant, deeming it "cartoonish." Brauchli's chosen editor for the paper's new glossy magazine was tossed aside for a Murdoch lieutenant and his vision for it scrapped. And Brauchli's authority was sufficiently undercut that on a recent trip to the San Francisco bureau he began explicitly invoking Murdoch's name to explain some plans for the future, not even making the pretense of broad consensus among top editors. "My view of that situation is, and I'm hard-pressed to think how anyone could think of it differently, is Rupert Murdoch is the editor in chief of The Wall Street Journal," media writer Michael Wolff told the Observer. All the more important, then, to look at new information on where Murdoch wants to take the paper.