A statement about the Guardian


Today I named veteran Bay Area journalist Stephen Buel publisher of the San Francisco Bay Guardian.

And following the resignation of Editor and Publisher Tim Redmond, I named longtime Bay Guardian editor Marke Bieschke interim editor of the paper.

Buel, editorial vice president of the San Francisco Newspaper Company, will bolster the paper’s fortunes while upholding its long tradition of investigative journalism, progressive values and cultural coverage. Bieschke, the paper’s managing editor, nightlife columnist and long-time San Francisco resident and activist will help provide vision and leadership on the print and digital editions of the Guardian.

“The Guardian has been losing money, and we were forced to contemplate some editorial layoffs,” Buel said. “Tim decided to resign rather than follow through with what we were discussing. I am dedicated to reversing the Guardian’s fortunes and helping it grow again.

“While we will all miss Tim’s skills as a journalist, I would like to assure the Guardian faithful that it will remain the progressive newspaper of record in San Francisco. I suspect there will be some skepticism about that, but over time, I am confident that readers will not be disappointed.”

— Todd Vogt, president and publisher of the San Francisco Newspaper Company, parent company of the Guardian, SF Weekly and The San Francisco Examiner.


going thru the motions and I recently anticipated here exactly this scenario.

I'm not sure this ship can be turned around but nobody will blame you for trying.

But, seriously, what happened to that alleged 20 million lawsuit judgment that SFBG won? I'd have thought a sum that large would guarantee SFBG for many years regardless.

The "Friday at 5" memo is a bit of a cliché, but thanks for letting us know.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 4:44 pm

I will miss Tim enough to stop reading this paper altogether. Unfortunately, it has become little more than a money-making gambit for the new owner. That's not how it started or what it should be about. For me, it points to the danger facing a free and independent press all across this country. The fat cats are gobbling these progressive ventures up, making them over with the same tripe, and in the process changing their fundamental mission as a voice for the voiceless. In that sense, the Bay Guardian no longer a progressive outlet. Alarmingly, the BG is not alone. Newspapers are succumbing right and left to this neoliberal assault which amounts to a hostile takeover. Tim was right to resign.

Still, I am very sad to see him go. For me, Tim was *the* thoughtful, reasoned voice of progressivism at the Bay Guardian. I didn't always agree with him (esp. on endorsements), but I very much enjoyed his perspective and I don't believe he ever just "phoned in" a single piece. The trolls have been mouthing this line --and spewing insults-- ever since they latched on to this site like the sad leeches that they are. They are masters of the ad hominem, not much else. So now I am happy to leave the Bay Guardian to Mr. Vogt and his merry band of trolls. Y'all deserve each other.


Posted by Lisa on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 10:25 am

>"The trolls have been mouthing this line --and spewing insults-- ever since they latched on to this site like the sad leeches that they are. They are masters of the ad hominem, not much else."

As opposed to you Lisa, who would never insult other posters...oh, wait, you just did. You called people "sad leeches" in the same paragraph that you called THEM the masters of the ad hominem.

Just pointing out the hypocrisy. With Tim gone it is a lot harder to find now but it is still a huge part of Progressive whining.

Posted by Troll on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 10:57 am

IMHO, the phrase "sad leeches" is less an insult than an apt description of BG's resident trolls and their malicious antics.

Posted by A matter of opinion on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 11:44 am

My thoughts exactly. What a sad, engineered demise of one of the few papers that I felt represented my voice. mission accomplished, I guess.

Posted by Guest David Faulk on Jun. 18, 2013 @ 9:03 pm

He's the cream in my coffee.

Posted by Pete on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 4:48 pm

You have got to be the *dumbest* person ever to grace these message boards. Everybody, and I mean everybody, knows these "Johnny is so great - he's #1!" posts are coming from anybody but you.

First of all, nobody talks like that. Second of all, you suck. Third of all, your arrival to the SFBG coincides almost exactly with it's demise.

Posted by Lurker on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 7:55 pm


What else is in store for the four SF publications you either own outright or partially? Can we expect the Weakly and the Guardian to merge? Will you gobble up more stock in the BAR? How will the Ex compete news-wise and in terms of ad dollars with the Chronicle?

Sure would like to hear from you, speaking as a news consumer and watchdog, what you think are the benefits to readers with you controlling three papers and a stake in another.

Posted by MPetrelis on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:00 pm

synergy between these disparate and incomplete papers.

Credibility wouldn't hurt either.

And a lack of the prejudices and biases that were always a part of Tim's musings.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 7:27 am

But the conservative bias of many of the commenters here is perfectly fine, of course.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 7:58 am

At least not in the GOP religious right kind of way.

The folks here who get called "troll" or "conservative" here are simply moderate centrist Democrats. Only in SF would they be perceived as conservatives by some.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 8:12 am

Those "moderate Dems" are perfectly fine with the erosion of our civil liberties and the uber-Big Brother national surveillance state. "Moderate" doesn't begin to describe the Obama-bots who have never learned to think for themselves. Fascist is more like it.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 9:38 am

Corporate boosters should have no place in "the people's party."

Posted by marcos on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 10:06 am

been to Utah, Oklahoma or some such.

The majority of SF'ers are moderately liberal Democrats, but the far left brands them as conservatives, wrongly.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 10:24 am

No, you're trying to position yourselves as "moderate" by applying that moniker to your group. When you open your mouth to comment, the truth comes out. The funny thing is, you don't realize it, but it's on display for everyone else who is genuinely moderate and progressive. You sir are a joke.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 2:01 pm

Is it that I voted for Obama twice?

Is it that I support abortion rights and gay marriage?

Is it that i have never voted Republican?

Because each of those is true for me. And yet you claim i am right-wing.

That says much more about you than it says about me.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 2:25 pm

Especially after having had it for so long.

On the other hand I'm looking forward to the SFBG's resident "sassy gay" Marke's contribution. Twerk it grrrllll - TWERK!

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:02 pm

Although, unlike Tim, he is a renter and doesn't have a lawyer wife.

Maybe he can get a job at Burning Man?

Still, the future is JAW.

Johnny, Johnny, Johnny.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:19 pm

Agree about Johnny. I absolutely love his much-dailyed scribe stuff.

Posted by Edward on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:35 pm

"interim" editor job probably signifies that the job was offered to Steven and he didn't want it (selling out, blah blah).

So Marke, who I always thought was the gopher and janitor, gets to be editor but he probably won't have anyone else's work to edit, especially given that JAW is more a stream-of-consciousness guy who will not, nay can not, be edited.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:55 pm

Burning man won't hire Steven, even they agree that he is a giant douche.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 9:17 am

I for one will Miss Tim Redmond. He put in roughly 30 years at the Guardian. Although Johnny Angel will ease the pain somewhat. Johhny's a good hard-hitting journalist who sticks to the core value-fact stuff.

Todd, one question:

Are you worried about a new lawsuit over alleging oligarchical tactics in the weekly market. Looking back, the Guardian won a lawsuit against the Weekly for alleged price-cutting to price out the competition.

Well, aren't you now worried that someone will accuse you of price-fixing under your new monopoly in the weekly-print edition market? Somebody else who publishes a weekly may demand that Herr Bruce pay some of the money he won in the lawsuit against the Weekly to them/him/her. Is Bruce now quivering in his boots?

Posted by Dick on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:25 pm

He's a businessman not a journalist.

SFBG will be what it will be. But the financials evidently aren't promising for a journal that always derived most of it's income from hooker ad's, who now of course use the internet for free marketing.

Bruce saw the writing on the wall and cashed out after the lawsuit, although he probably settled for much less than the judgment just to get out of there while he still could.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:40 pm

Well, it is in all progressive's interests that the bleeding stop.

Any discussion of merging the Guardian/Weekly/Examiner into a single publication? You could call the publication: BG Weekly Examination. That's my idea. You don't even have to pay me one thin dime if you want to use it. Swear to God.

You could save lots of back-office costs and achieve synergy enhancements, ie, build up synergistic know-how and efficiencies in a cost-advantageous structural paradign. Just an idea, folks.

Posted by Edward on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:32 pm

I'm sure that Tim loved his job here so this is sad news.

But I also think it is fair to say that he didn't make the most of the opportunity he had.

There isn't much value in a story about one guy getting off a Google bus and not saying 'excuse me' loud enough to a woman that he bumps.

Reacting to everything that Nevius writes was an embarrassment.

Calculating the expense of flying a private jet once a month from New York to 8 Washington didn't move the conversation along.

Meanwhile, someone like Joe Eskenazi published stuff with education value. Like one of the problems with Muni is that they don't even bar-code their parts. Eskenazi recently wrote about the very real problems with Clean Power SF, something that Tim would never acknowledge because it suggested a Progressive failing.

So, yes, it's sad but it will be good for the city

Posted by Troll on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:48 pm

He saw the writing on the wall and could not be assed. It showed in his mediocre narrative in the last few months.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 5:59 pm

Late Friday Afternoon.

When the knives come out...

Posted by Sam on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 6:04 pm

At least we still have Johnny to provide some intellectual heft to the paper!

Posted by Rip on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 6:18 pm

Newspapers are dead, alternative papers are deader!

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 7:34 pm

This is like mourning the passing of your delusional Uncle Frank's imaginary rabbit. The SFBG has been a joke for years and the chief joker was that fool and his weekly diatribes. And btw, Canadians, Michael Petrolpiss is just shilling for a gig. Something he has been doing since his mother had him arrested when he was still in her womb.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 8:00 pm

"Rather than follow through on what we were discussing":

"what we were discussing," of course is not spelled out, but it doesn't need to be spelled out. The English translation is obvious. Whatever it was, if Tim chose to resign rather than do it, then you can bet your ass that the corporate masters have one hell of a shit sandwich in store.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 8:34 pm

The SFBG band is done.

Posted by matlock on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 9:24 pm

You'll have no purpose in your life. Are you going to commit suicide?

Posted by Greg on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 9:52 pm

Yeah no shit. Him and the other fools (anon, Lucretia, etc) here who come here everyday to just show how much they hated the SFBG, Tim, Steve, and Bruce will be the most dissapointed at Tim's resigning.

Thanks Tim and Bruce and Steve for fighting the good fight for as long as you did (hopefully Steve stays). Hopefully something good will arise (including possibly a strong online SFBG - get rid of the troll commentators though) so that there will be something besides an SF Chron that is barely more than Junk Nevius, bland AP articles about events far from SF, and a Matier & Ross that never learned how to do any real investigative reporting (along with an editorial column more fit for Reno, NV).

Good luck Tim!

(and Trolls, go fuck yourselves)

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 11:16 pm

These people obviously have no life in the quote-unquote real world.

An idea worth considering:

Promote Greg as a new cub editor. He always has prescient stuff here.

Posted by Edward on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 2:23 am

The left has always tried to suppress criticism, most obviously in the communist nations where there was no democracy, no free speech and no freedom of movement.

Attempting to discourage criticism via the mechanism of attributing critics with epithets like "troll" shows the same totalitarian intolerance that was the damning hallmark of failed socialist experiments the world over.

do not repeat those mistakes and send out the clear message that progressivism welcomes all opinions and does not hate those who disagree.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:22 am

I've been vacationing at Breitbart.com recently using my Disqus account. Below is an amusing interchange I had just yesterday which I thought might be of interests to SFBG forum readers and trolls alike. The occasion of the discussion was the posting of a youtube video by commenter "fanof" which purported to show a former KGB agent revealing how Marxism was being taught in American schools since the 1950's in order to sow societal weakness and "feelings of hopelessness." Naturally that set my BS detector alarm off.

fanof lillipublicans • a day ago

You missed the big picture it's not about gays, it about the whole society at large.
Sorry you have such a tiny mind closed mind and want to silence those who disagree with you.
Do I go to your favorite web site and disrupt threads? do I go there and insult people who like to read what they read? No I do not..
Let the reader decide... you do not agree with this web site's news, you do not agree with most of the comments, you are here to disrupt the thread and to insult others as you have demonstrated.. so poorly I might add.


Share ›

lillipublicans fanof • 21 hours ago

You have no idea how gratifying it is to read your comments; more so because I have no doubt that your statement about not going to my favorite web site and disrupting threads is perfectly true.

See, *you* have no way knowing how your complaint so exquisitely parallels the complaints of regular like-minded commenters on that site. They have reacted that way again and again and again to the right wing blowhards who work tirelessly to do exactly what you accuse me of doing.

Yes, I came to visit here two weeks ago as part experiment, part payback, part prophylactic "attack the problem at its source" action. But note well: I do *not* use the tactics to which I've been subjected. I do not use the tactics you accuse me of. I do not rely exclusively on insults or misstating the opinions of those whom I have disagreements in order to make it seem as though I've won a debate.

I do not repeat the same boring memes over and over and over again while ignoring the thoughtful responses which refute them. I have (mostly*) not imputed attitudes and behaviors to others that I have no knowledge of in order to subvert their credibility.

I did throw in mention of gayness in regard to this video which was ever so slightly a non-sequitur, but honestly: you did not address my points with regard to the internal inconsistencies within the conspiracy theory presented in the video.

On the other site I frequent, the winger trolls often accuse the regulars there of being unwilling to face opposing viewpoints. They pretend to be there for our edification -- even though, as I said, they do not engage in any meaningful give-and-take. The more certainly their argument and/or facts have been defeated, the more stubbornly they will repeat -- ad nauseum! -- their fantastic lies of having "won another debate."

The truth is that in addition to all the above reasons, I come here to find common ground. I think there is plenty of reason to dislike the current implementation of American democracy and that contrary to the conspiracy promoted in the video, it may actually be that those who seek to amplify and fabricate divisions within American society on an extreme left-right basis are in fact working to subvert us.

*When people exhibit virulent anti-gay attitudes, I do tend to suspect they are deeply conflicted and self-supressed homosexuals or have strong homosexual tendencies. This is a phenomenon which has innumerable real-life examples.


Read the whole thread and story here:

Posted by lillipublicans on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:58 am

another website that you haven't been banned from yet?

It's bad enough being subjective to your lunacy here without having to be faced with it elsewhere.

Here's another idea. Put the keyboard down, go outside and DO SOMETHING. If you don't have an interesting or productive real life, you will not have anything interesting or productive to say here either.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 9:14 am

These people obviously have no life in the quote-unquote real world.

An idea worth considering:

Promote Greg as a new cub editor. He always has prescient stuff here.

Posted by Edward on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 2:26 am

He prefers to carp from the sidelines.

His anti-cop shtick gets tedious too.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 5:38 am

Thanks for the compliment, but I have a day job, and an editor's salary would be a significant demotion. A lot of trolls have accused me of "class envy" over the time I've been here. Well let's just say that I think many of the bragging trolls are "big hat and no cattle," while my style is more cattle but small hat.

The times when I'm not working, I'm out enjoying life too much. Notice I write less when the weather is warm -I have a life outside fighting internet trolls!

And besides... particularly after reading some of the comments below, I don't think the new owners will be very interested in bringing that kind of perspective.

I don't fault Bruce for selling the paper. A guy's gotta retire at some point. But it's just sad to see the decline since the new owners took over. Their corporate approach of downsizing people to make money is a proven failure.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 11:28 am

you're guilty of the same "bragging about money" sin that you love to accuse others of.

Not that I am buying it as I think that's just a cover. there are some wealthy liberals, of course, but they are usually super wealthy, not just salaried stiffs like you.

Oh, and you post here at least as much as any other one poster, so your "get a life" shticks doesn't hold water either.

Face it, Greg, your side lost yet again here. I'd have thought you were used to that by now, and would take it with more dignity and style.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:32 pm

There are times when I've responded with just enough of a response to dispel a myth/assumption/misconception, but really, I like to keep it about ideas rather than personalities.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 7:33 pm

help explain why you have so much free time and little better to do than endlessly post here.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 7:28 am

Agreed about the cattle/hat thing, Greg.

You rock. I always love your reponses.

Posted by Edward on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 2:21 pm


Real credible.

Oh, and Greg hates Asians so don't fall too much in love with him.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 2:51 pm

You trolls really do need to get a life.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 7:36 pm

but everyone knows you loath Asians Greg. It really has everything to do with you and your prejudice and nothing to do with me.

I'd advocate that you spend time volunteering at the Chinese Hospital to show your penance and willingness to confront your deep-seated prejudice. 10-20 hours a week for a couple of years would show your willingness to confront your own demons. Anything less is unacceptable.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:25 pm

You invented this whole anti-Asian shtick of thin air because you were bitter at being called out for some truly horrendous things you said, such as "African Americans should be grateful to Europeans for their ensalvement." The only problem with the counter of "oh yeah, well you hate Asians!"... is that I showed not one inkling of anything of the sort. Having no quotes of mine, you resorted to using your sock puppets to create the impression that "everyone" agrees with you, and then quickly rush to your sock puppet's (aka your own) defense when you're called on it.

I love the way you accuse JAW of having sock puppets (projection much?) when everyone knows you're the most prolific troll on here. You really are one truly despicable piece of work.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 9:09 pm

No - Greg thinks HE knows.

He doesn't.

Please consider meritorious service to the Asian community through volunteering at the Chinese Hospital. It really will help you confront your white male privilege.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 9:35 pm