PDA

View Full Version : Tribune vs. Sun-Times


ramblinsoxfan11
04-03-2009, 01:20 AM
First of all I would like to say this is my first thread posted on WSI, although I have been visiting the site for the past 5 or 6 years, I finally got around to getting a username :bandance:

Anyways, I know both papers are bias towards the cubs, but when compared to each other which one has a better treatment towards the Sox? I ask this because I was thinking of getting a subscription to one of the two, but I do not want to forsake my baseball team in doing so. Are there any other major newspapers that are both legit and have at least equal coverage of both the Sox and the cubs? Forgive my ignorance, I am only a poor stupid college kid :?:

Go Sox!!!

doublem23
04-03-2009, 01:24 AM
Well, I think buying your newspaper based on the support it shows your baseball team is silly, but even so, the Sun-Times is garbage and dying, so you may as well just cast your lot with the Tribune, which is kind of readable and dying much slower.

Nellie_Fox
04-03-2009, 01:29 AM
Well, I think buying your newspaper based on the support it shows your baseball team is silly, but even so, the Sun-Times is garbage and dying, so you may as well just cast your lot with the Tribune, which is kind of readable and dying much slower.Besides, the Trib has John Kass.

Frater Perdurabo
04-03-2009, 05:55 AM
Do you actually live in the City? If not, you might pick the Daily Herald (NW or North suburbs) or Daily Southtown Star (SW or South suburbs).

Both of those papers are much fairer and more balanced in their coverage of the baseball teams.

EDIT: Just saw your handle that says you live in Rogers Park. I guess you could pick a community newspaper, since you can get Sox coverage online, including at WSI.

SOXfnNlansing
04-03-2009, 06:19 AM
:welcome:

I'd go with the Suntimes. That is what I read at work.

WhiteSox1989
04-03-2009, 06:29 AM
I read the Suntimes.

soxfan21
04-03-2009, 06:47 AM
I subscribe to the sun times as well, not too bad sox coverage, although cowley gets annoying sometimes.

DeuceUnit
04-03-2009, 07:44 AM
Without a doubt, Sun-Times.

tebman
04-03-2009, 08:02 AM
Sun-Times. Better sports section overall and it doesn't own the other baseball team.

Get it while you can. Either or both papers may not be with us if the trend continues.

MarkZ35
04-03-2009, 12:03 PM
I have a subscription to the Southtown and Sun-Times. I had the Tribune for many years before this year when we ended our subscription. We've had the Southtown for at least 5 years now and I can't stand the professional sports coverage. Within the past year it has gone very local with high schools and the entire sports section seems to have gotten smaller but all papers are. But back to the subject. The Trib and the Sun Times are pretty equal I believe but I seem to like the Sun Times a little better than I liked the Tribune.

russ99
04-03-2009, 12:07 PM
Sorry guys, I can't deal with the Trib, even with the new format.

It's still the one elitist right-wing paper in the city, and I don't think their Cub-focus is going away, even when they don't own the team anymore - unless they clean house completely in the sports department.

I'll be reading the Sun-Times. Either as a newspaper or if (when) they go online-only.

Nellie_Fox
04-03-2009, 01:43 PM
it's still the one elitist right-wing paper in the cityNo politics!

TomBradley72
04-03-2009, 02:55 PM
I think the Tribune is the better overall paper.

But specific to White Sox coverage, it will just irritate you. Sometime this summer, the White Sox will be on a 6 game winning streak, and you'll have to dig hard to find their coverage, it will be under a "Somber Streak" headline or something like that.

The Cubs will have lost 8-1, but there will be a big color picture of Aramis Ramirez trotting around the bases after his meaningless solo homer into the basket in the 8th inning, and you blood pressure will go up, putting your health at risk, and you deserve more than that for you 75 cents/day.

In addition, when the Trib publishes a special pull out section to celebrate the 40th anniversary of the glorious 1969 Cubs, but barely mentions the 50th anniversary of the AL champion 1959 White Sox, it will send you over the edge.

thomas35forever
04-03-2009, 03:02 PM
I much prefer the Sun-Times. Not only is it easier to read, but it's got a good comics page too! Besides, the Tribune lost its reputation of being a serious paper when they switched everything up.

sox2000divchamps
04-03-2009, 03:52 PM
Besides, the Trib has John Kass.

YES! The only rational guy in ether paper. I skim through the Trib in the morning, but really throughtly read the Wall Street Journal. Now thats a good paper.

sox2000divchamps
04-03-2009, 03:53 PM
Sorry guys, I can't deal with the Trib, even with the new format.

It's still the one elitist right-wing paper in the city, and I don't think their Cub-focus is going away, even when they don't own the team anymore - unless they clean house completely in the sports department.

I'll be reading the Sun-Times. Either as a newspaper or if (when) they go online-only.

No way is the Trib more "Elitest" than the Sun Times.

kittle42
04-03-2009, 03:54 PM
I skim through the Trib in the morning, but really throughtly read the Wall Street Journal. Now thats a good paper.

I love their sports section. Underrated!

sox2000divchamps
04-03-2009, 03:56 PM
I love their sports section. Underrated!

The new WSJ one? If so, yeah it has some pritty intersting facts in it, too.

slavko
04-03-2009, 05:05 PM
No politics!Especially if it's not true.

Demafrost
04-07-2009, 11:41 AM
The good news is, the Trib and Sun Times are so desperate for subscriptions, you can probably just call each of them up and tell them you are thinking about subscribing and tell them you want Sox biased coverage and they'd probably do it.

jabrch
04-07-2009, 12:49 PM
Both papers suck.

I get my news on line - sports, business and other. If I ever started taking the train again, and needed reading materials, I might reconsider. But until then - I won't support either of those rags.

Nellie_Fox
04-07-2009, 02:22 PM
Both papers suck.

I get my news on line - sports, business and other.I said it before and I'll say it again. When all the newpapers go out of business, where do you think the online services will get their news? They don't employ reporters. They either steal the information from the newspapers or just "aggregate" headlines and provide links to the stories, both of which will disappear along with the newspapers.

In fact, AP is starting to sue "aggregator" sites for copyright infringement. For even quoting a couple of sentences before the "click-through" link (thus reaffirming WSI policy of not allowing any quoting from copyrighted sources.)

sox2000divchamps
04-07-2009, 05:37 PM
I said it before and I'll say it again. When all the newpapers go out of business, where do you think the online services will get their news? They don't employ reporters. They either steal the information from the newspapers or just "aggregate" headlines and provide links to the stories, both of which will disappear along with the newspapers.

In fact, AP is starting to sue "aggregator" sites for copyright infringement. For even quoting a couple of sentences before the "click-through" link (thus reaffirming WSI policy of not allowing any quoting from copyrighted sources.)

Thank you. I wish everyone thought like you.

MarkZ35
04-07-2009, 05:53 PM
I said it before and I'll say it again. When all the newpapers go out of business, where do you think the online services will get their news? They don't employ reporters. They either steal the information from the newspapers or just "aggregate" headlines and provide links to the stories, both of which will disappear along with the newspapers.

In fact, AP is starting to sue "aggregator" sites for copyright infringement. For even quoting a couple of sentences before the "click-through" link (thus reaffirming WSI policy of not allowing any quoting from copyrighted sources.)
I understand what your saying but why pay for the cow if you get the milk for free? It's the papers fault for having the stories online.

Nellie_Fox
04-08-2009, 12:02 AM
I understand what your saying but why pay for the cow if you get the milk for free?I still get two papers daily. I don't want to have to go to about fifteen different web sites to get the local news, national news, international news, sports, comics, crossword, sudoku, columnists, etc.

In fact, now that I've listed all that, it would probably take more than fifteen sites.

BainesHOF
04-08-2009, 10:33 AM
Easily the Sun-Times.

MarkZ35
04-08-2009, 03:29 PM
I still get two papers daily. I don't want to have to go to about fifteen different web sites to get the local news, national news, international news, sports, comics, crossword, sudoku, columnists, etc.

In fact, now that I've listed all that, it would probably take more than fifteen sites.
I agree and also get two papers delivered daily but I understand why people don't have subscriptions anymore. Many people work on their computers all day and it is just easier to get the free articles online.