“In May 1998, [Los Angeles Times publisher Mark] Willis told the Wall Street Journal that he wanted to make the Times more appealing to women and minorities by producing stories that were “more emotional, more personal and less analytic.””

I'm not quite sure how to rate this. Events and all else as would be considered news is still analyzed but now, with an ever greater inclination toward proselyting for the statist theocracy; such being dressed in emotional tales.

God forbid the public should actually "analyze" the news. They might start asking questions like: How could Adam Lanza use an AR 15 to shoot up a school when the rifle was found in his car? And where did the other two handguns that were found come from? Or, who were the other 2 (3?) people that were arrested and what if any part did they play in the shooting? Nawww....let's go get a latte and see if we can get the latest Ipad.

More emotional, this should appeal to liberals as they are much more emotional than analytical. The last election, for example.

I think this quote is useless. It is not controversial or important. It's the publisher's preference. More power to him.
Walt