I get the Enterprise online and get both the paper and online versions of the Bee.

The Enterprise is a throwback paper of the old style that I read more for the local news and commentary. I've enjoyed reading Bob Dunning's columns for years and Debra DeAngelo is one of my favorite columnists who has a wicked sense of humor and isn't afraid of expressing her feelings in a personal and direct manner about important social and political issues.

I've also read the Bee since the mid 70's and I think it is an excellent newspaper. I wish they covered Aggie sports in more depth, of course, but, in regards to important issues at the local, state and national level, I think they do a very good job.

All newspapers, except perhaps for the most notable papers like the Wall Street Journal and Washington Post etc, are undergoing difficult times trying to compete with internet news sites. I guess I'm old school and still appreciate papers like the Enterprise and the Bee.

I do not get any print papers anymore. I will agree that the bee is a fairly decent newspaper for the sac area. The enterprise will always be good for davis and yolo. The issues I have with the bee is that it is actually VERY biased against UC Davis. We can mince words about sports coverage as I posted as good versus bad or none, but the unfortunate truth is the sac bee is not happy with UC Davis and is in no way going to report favorably on this campus. How do i know this? I had an unexpected e-mail exchange with one of the editors of the bee last year regarding the katehi affair. Regarding UC Davis, this editor stated in summery: “we have absolutely no interest in promoting or even to engage in positive reporting on UC Davis. That is its job. However, we will continue to act as a “watchdog” over UC Davis as we see fit to do. This is the bees philosophy. Compare this to the SF Chronicle which reports on all the Bay Area universities with unabashed pride, including sports: cal, Stanford, st Mary’s, USF, SJS, and even CS Eastbay and UC Santa Cruz. It has links to the websites of the athletic programs as well. It’s coverage of the game tomorrow with st Mary’s covers more facts on the Aggie woman’s team than has ever been seen in the bee. Why is the bee doing this? I invite those smarter than me to respond. Methinks its downright stupid!

Other than football, and even in football it's spotty, the Bee's coverage of local colleges, UCD and that other school, is pretty spotty. Look at how many articles are buried in a regional sports or sports summary column, and contain the line, "according to a [UCD/Sacramento State] website." Away games, if they get any coverage at all, are from wire services or stringers, or the above "[insert name of school here] website." You have a better chance of reading about some reserve Kings player's hangnail recovery than about a local college sporting event.

A DE writer recently mentioned his very low pay ($12 an hour?) and pressures writing in a city like Davis.

Sports editor Bruce G is retiring come March. He wrote about it recently.

The other shoe that dropped, which was expected, is the retirement of his wife, editor Debbie Davis. Article up, Davis on Davis.

She says a contributing reason for their retirement was to avoid the Davis Enterprise having to make other very painful cuts. She also makes a pitch for Davis residents to subscribe to keep the paper viable.

Speaking of the bee, rumors are that the bee did not want mayor steinberg to Agee to name the newly planned sacramento tech/innovation center “Aggie Square.” Bee liked the concept very much but felt the name was too UC Davis centric. To his credit, chancellor May stuck to his guns. Don’t know if the bee wanted it named “Hornet Square” or not. May seems to have the right stuff so far.

Just a follow up here. Recent sac bee editorial re: proposed UC Davis tech hub in sac: great idea, but “Aggie Square” is a no go name. Upshot: bee wants UC Davis to move a lot of tech, innovation and engineering resources to sac and will propose calling it “UC Square.” So, bee finally gets what it has always coveted- a “UC Sacramento” paid for by (yes) UC Davis. I hope the academic senate (or UCOP) squashes this idea like an ugly (and expensive) bug.
:

Screw The Bee and their wants. That’s all I have to add.

Inferiority complex?

It is very irksome to see politicians roll out these vague pronouncements to puff up their personal stature. This “Aggie Square” in sac idea is so flawed and seemingly unthought out that it is laughable.
Atlanta Ga. has the 4th largest number of Fortune 500 companies in the country and a GNP of 324 billion. Tech Square was essentially a $179 million redevelopment project immediately adjacent to Georgia Tech built on old disused parking lots in a rundown part of the city. Georgia Tech did not at all fund this project except to say that it would gladly use it for expansion. Georgia Tech is the proud recipient of tremendous philanthropic support from the likes of Coca Cola, CNN, Delta AL, Walmart, etc. compare sac: zero corporate HQs of any signigcance. Zero philanthropy from sac corporations to UC Davis. Zero UC Davis support from sac media. But the real kicker is UC Davis is 15 miles away from downtown sac (sac bee says more Yolo buses will fix that issue!). Why would any sane person support this? Sorry for the rant, but had to get this off my chest.

I've subscribed to the Bee for decades, mainly bc it's the only game around if you are old school and like to have a paper in your hand. From my perspective, the Bee is so far left they are radical. They editorialize in the news section and put a very far left perspective on every event they report. A great example of "fake news," lol.

In my opinion the Bee fairly reflects the views of the majority of people in this highly diverse, politically progressive state which is fine for me. I would consider myself as being a politically progressive centrist but far from being "radical" and I like the viewpoints of the Bee. To each their own though...

Pretty one sided. Pot good, abortion good, illegal immigrants saints, POC victims, business bad, Democrats saints, etc.

Left papers lose 20-30% of their business when they ignor a large percentage of their base.

It's interesting that on some topics, especially their ever liberal op ed page, often 70-80% of yhe comments page are moderate or conservative. Places like Dixon, Winters, Woodland traditionally conservative.

Agalum you have a very valid point. At least you and i read a newspaper together. We can agree to disagree on the content which is fine and good. But my main point is that ironically the bee (very liberal we can agree) is not a supporter of very liberal UC Davis or the City of Davis which the bee constantly dirides as that “quirky” little college town. So this is not a politically driven situation, especially when you consider that the bee is very supportive of UC Berkeley and covers cal sports much mor than UCD’s. IMHO the bee considers UC Davis/City of Davis’ positive image as a threat to sac’s and that is the reason for the lack of support. Therefore, we have to do everything we can to prevent the demise of the Enterprise. SUBSCRIBE TO THE ENTERPRISE!!!

Maybe they got tired of our spanking the Hornets for 20 straight years? And maybe they think Davis feels superior?

Maybe, but now they want UC Davis to spend its precious resources for what amounts to a sac redevelopment project. Go figure.

There is nothing like reading a good paper over breakfast and coffee or tea. I'm at the age in which everyone my age or younger than me has little experience with newspapers, but everyone older than me has. The Bee sometimes does good reporting, but in comparison to other papers, it falls short esp in sports. After the Kings, you might get a series on Sac State (all glowing of course). But maybe a token Davis article as if to appear unbiased.

Is this the beginning of the end for the print bee? Bee just announced today that they must add 45,000 new subscribers if it is to keep its print version going.

Very confusing plea by the Bee. They really seem to be ready to kiss off the print edition, which may be the future of newspapers in any event. Article talks about the need for 45,000 new digital subscriptions.
http://www.sacbee.com/news/local/article212796919.html

Many of the suggestions seem to have to do with digital delivery. Daily reports, consolidating the McClathcy newspaper reporting in the valley, shrinking the size of the already diminutive print edition....

And a digital subscription is now $130 a year. https://account.sacbee.com/static/subscribe/ Don't ask what a print subscription costs. Looking at the Bee website is like trying to understand a new car contract. Nothing tells the reader the actual price, only the introductory offers and the "from as low as...."

Meanwhile they lay off reporters and as noted, have abandoned local college sports.

Amend that to read “. . . have abandoned local college sports” and THE UNIVERSITIES AS WELL. One has to wonder about this journalistic strategy. The SFChron has a quite different take on coverage of local colleges and revels in covering them ALL. And with a positive tone. It even notes the athletic websites for them all from Stanford to Cal State East bay and all in betweeen (and as we know, its a lot in the Bay Area). Yes, the Chron covers the bad stuff at Berkeley and Stanford, but it knows people are very proud of their colleges and what they do for humanity, so it emphases all the good things they do in a positive light. I think i posted long ago what a former bee editor told me about this: “UC Davis can very well blow its own horn, but we are the watchdogs and we don’t do that kind of journalism (or close to that)”. I think that sort of negative emphasis on the bad stuff to sell papers just is not the right way to go. Maybe part of the bee problems. Anyway, don’t see the Chron sending any out any similar distress calls. . . By the way, i do hope that the bee survives. As the WP says: “democracy dies in darkness”.

I don't know about SoCal ... UCD, UCB, UCSC all pretty liberal.