The NYT supposedly reaches some 18.2 million unique visitors per month and growing (http://en.kioskea.net/actualites/traffic-to-us-newspaper-websites-up-16-pct-nielsen-online-11907-actualite.php3).

"The print product, meanwhile, is sold to a mere million readers a day and dropping, and the Sunday print edition to 1.4 million (and also dropping)."(http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200901/new-york-times)

The NYT say they have 830k subscribers with 2 or more years history with the company. (http://www.businessinsider.com/2009/1/new-york-times-were-not-going-bankrupt-in-may-nyt)

This is just one company, but my non-rigorous opinion is that high-fixed costs print journalism has been getting replaced by the unprofitable web in people's daily routines. In the last few years,bull markets insulated the industry from too much change on the margin; tough cuts weren't made, debt was increased.

All of a sudden the recession and comes and the surgeons start cutting and cutting fast.

I think you are exactly right that the power of this chat is how the individuals are getting hit. Technology and recessions lead to real pain, but I think the cuts and the salary levels ultimately reflect the supply and demand for journalism.

On top of all the discounting of traditional reporting is the separate issue that arises online: link baiting.

David Brooks rehashing the Pew research on city vs suburban preference can still pass as the most popular article on the NYT website; pew didn't even release the stats, just a report. how many people and at what salary does it really take to provide this sort of fungible content? How long before the NYT figures they don't need the Brooks brand to push a press release?

I love news, but I get almost everything from academic blogs nowadays. They make it for free and I get more value. I am not too confident in the future of non expert coverage.