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.


observation on this thread that you hate Asians (as well as cops, America, successful people etc. but let's stay focused here).

It was me. I can understand why you would want to believe that only one person here has noticed your racism but I'm afraid that isn't true, because your bias is quite obvious to even a casual reader here.

I mentioned here only because one of JAW's sock puppets opined that you could edit this journal. Why I feel sure that would be a step up for you, such a job really should go to someone who doesn't hate based on classification systems, but rather sees people as individuals.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 7:25 am

Face it, you were pwned with that last comment of Greg's

Posted by Guest on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 8:20 pm

She is everywhere, she is in everything, she rides on the winds and she swims beneath the seas. She is the goddess and the devil, she is male and female. She inhabits your dreams and your nightmares. You see her in the mirror every morning and in your thoughts before you sleep.

Lucretia is omnipotent.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 9:17 pm

...like crab lice, in other words.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 8:00 am

Most people don't share your affliction.

Posted by Lucretia Snapples on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 8:30 pm

Even Greg himself isn't claiming that I am she.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 8:14 am

weight loss pills good or bad One more important aspect is that if you are an older person, travel insurance for pensioners is something that is important to really take into consideration. The elderly
you are, the harder at risk you might be for having something terrible
happen to you while in most foreign countries. If you are
never covered by a number of comprehensive insurance plan,
you could have a number of serious troubles. Thanks for discussing your advice
on this blog site. doc oz weight loss pill

Posted by dr oz weight loss exercises on Jul. 23, 2014 @ 12:06 pm

If he was laid off, then he would.

After 30 years, he should get a year's pay or so.

And at age 55, he can retire and live off his home equity and wife's salary. Maybe do a few part-time political gigs.

He'll be fine - don't worry about him

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 5:37 am

Perhaps Tim will get into the landlord business and become a model for progressives.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 9:54 am

He obviously has the Trump touch, like his mentor Bruce.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:33 pm

of course.

Posted by matlock on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 1:35 pm

say yesterday that both he and Tim "came from privilege"?

Of course, coming from privilege in their parlance might just mean being white. Hard to say.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 1:52 pm

governmental watch dog.

Posted by matlock on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 9:09 pm

Take your meds, your hallucinating, either that or you barely ever read the paper, probably the latter since you hated it so much. Take a one-way trip to TX or Iran where you belong.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 14, 2013 @ 11:20 pm

Not complaining that the government is not gouging the citizens enough.

Posted by matlock on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 1:37 pm

It would blindly support the city government on something like rent control.

But then it would blindly oppose whatever the police wanted to do.

Being a watchdog implies some measure of objectivity. The SFBG was shamelessly partisan.

And shamefully wrong on almost everything.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 1:55 pm

And you, of course, are not shamelessly partisan and most certainly never wrong.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 10:58 am

But this is about Tim...

I feel like I've been waiting a long time to watch Progressives become irrelevant in San Francisco. And it's happening - finally. Most of all I'm loving it, but we're losing a few people who were worthy opposition.

Tim was that guy.

I am 33 - I have been reading his work since I was 22. And what made him so infuriating was that he *almost* made sense. You could never truly dismiss him, because to do so would be intellectual dishonest. His politics are shit, but he made you think.

Your new breed is utter shit, FYI. Johnny is hot garbage - he's what you trot out when your movement is done.

It's a new San Francisco... seriously. The type where you can crowd a BOS meeting, scream until your throat gives out, and nobody gives A FUCK. Sell your shitty art and gender equality seminars somewhere else - this town is fresh out of buyers. You have to work to live here now.


Posted by Scram on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:07 am

The demise of the SFBG merely reflects the structural change in SF demographics and politics. The non-ideological can-do pragmatism of Mayor Lee now defines SF politics.

And most are happy about that.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 5:35 am

Don't sugarcoat it, Tim was fired. Here is his statement from Fog City Journal:
'Reached by phone, Redmond told FCJ, “At midnight last night I got a letter from Todd saying ‘your resignation is accepted.’ But I never submitted a resignation.”'

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 6:03 am

OK, we get that he didn't want to fire people. None of us do.

But Tim must have realized that those folks were going to get fired either way, so refusing to accept reality was naïve, especially in one so allegedly experienced.

He should have become an adult just for a day and done what needed to be done.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 7:30 am

Tim was clearly fired for refusing to cut staff. Vogt is so cheap and vindictive he doesn't want to pay Tim a severance or unemployment.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 9:03 am

Tim knew the other staff were going to be fired regardless of whether he did it or his replacement. So he might as well have fired them and kept his own job. Or forced them to lay him off when he would collect compensation.

Seems to me Tim was just pig-headed here. While there is little doubt that heads had to roll because SFBG has been losing money ever since the hooker ad's dried up. It never really adapted to the internet.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 16, 2013 @ 9:18 am

Something you know nothing about.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 11:26 am

Loyalty to friends is what got progressives into this mess, mindless loyalty to friends irrespective of the consequences of their political conduct.

Imagine if the SFBG, nonprofits and labor showed loyalty to San Franciscans instead of each other?

This crowd is more concerned with following proper etiquette of court and paying due deference to the luminous personalities involved than with moving a political agenda.

Posted by marcos on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 11:42 am

The only (or main) progressive organ in town is going down in flames, and all you can do is take potshots at others. What have you ever done that's constructive? Tell us. More importantly, what do you intend to do besides mouth off?

Posted by Talk is Cheap on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 12:05 pm

"is going down in flames" is a passive voice construct that denies agency and responsibility. Poured gasoline on the flight deck and set it afire to keep warm and is now shocked, shocked, that the plane is going down in flames and that it must be someone else's fault is more like it.

Whenever a political movement only talks about what is important to itself and that messaging contains nothing that appeals to the broader political audience that has a say over matters, the voters, then that movement is going to fail as a simple matter of mathematics.

When political movements blame their opponents for their losses and attack their allies who point out how bogus that is while studiously ignoring their own role in the decline--because they're paid to--they face certain doom.

My own volunteer work to move the agenda was coopted and neutralized by those who've failed us. They still deny the fact that they've lost and they're doing nothing to change that. I've stopped providing free chits for these losers to trade away.

I have put in thousands of volunteer hours to move the progressive agenda. Why not apply the same attention to the people who are getting paid to run San Francisco's progressive movement into the ground as you do to me?

When the SFBG's source and political base has been essentially reduced to Gabriel Haaland, Sara Shortt, Fernando Marti, Peter Cohen, Calvin Welch and Leah Shahum, then it is probably better that they fold tent.

Posted by marcos on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 12:39 pm

for his own failures. He's all talk and no pants.

That said, you both fail to acknowledge the real reason for the failure of progressive politics in SF - the simple fact that it is nowhere as popular as you and he like to think.

The fact that a progressive hasn't won the mayor's race since the appalling, ill-fated one-term Agnos speaks volumes for the limits of the appeal of left-wing policies, even here.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 17, 2013 @ 1:26 pm

Here's a quote from the sfgate article:

"There were things (the owners) wanted to do with the Guardian that I was not interested in doing and I could not find in myself in good conscience to do."


My take on the shocking turn of events is that the SFBG owners wanted Tim to fire some (3?) SFBG employees and he said something like, "I'd rather quit than do that," and then his boss sent him an email with something like "okay we accept your desire to quit (resign)." It appears the first task of Tim's replacement will be to carry out a couple more firings, or "right-sizing" using corporate double-speak.

Regardless of what the specific "he said, he said" was leading to Tim's departure, it's a big change to me, to the SFBG, and probably to progressive politics in SF. If nothing else, SFBG was one place where the multitude of groups representing the progressive spectrum had a true voice, with Tim often the most articulate and passionate about the many causes that represent progressive politics in SF.

At one point Fog City Journal was almost as important a voice for progressive politics in SF, although I quit reading it when it seemed most of the commenters on articles were the usual loudmouths known for having lots of opinions but little in the way of insights. There's a large need for progressives in SF and the Bay Area to have a place where policies and ideas can be expressed and debated. Maybe Daily Kos will be that place, or maybe Tim can hook up with FCJ or another news outlet since his writing and perspective will be very sorely missed if he doesn't get back into the ring.

I also think the "progressive family" needs to put some pressure on some of its most prominent members such as Peskin, Ammiano, Mar, Adachi, Chiu, Avalos, Campos, Kim and others to begin spearheading progressive organizing and debate. When there's a big loss to a movement such as (hopefully temporarily) losing the stature and credibility of someone like Tim Redmond, it's for other leaders to step up and broaden their own comfort zone to take on the stability and enlargement of progessive voices.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 7:29 am

change in SF's demographics, which has led to the moderate majority?

Perhaps SF has grown up and become an adult?

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:08 am

Sad. I was probably the last to know that the SFBG had been sold. Wonder why it had taken such a precipitous nosedive. I think Redmond's firing, which appears to have been just as slimey and underhanded as it could be, frees him up to do what he does best: great investigative reporting on topics that matter.

Your paper is just another dumb weekly now. Congratulations.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 7:33 am

now that he has no publication?

Maybe Randy Shaw can hire him at BeyondChron? What do you think?

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:05 am

I came across this site when I was looking for information on the 555 Washington project on 2009, next to the pyramid. I saw one Tim Redmond article and could not believe the blatant bias.

I've never seen anything that even charitably could be called 'investigative reporting'. He would republish anything that he saw, regardless of merit or interest, indicating that 8 Washington, or Lyft, or Nevius, or rich people were bad.

He would try to make ridiculous links, like when he talked about the other clients of the paid signature gatherers that 8 Washington developer Snellgrove used. At the time he made no mention of the paid signature gatherers on the other side. He was utterly predictable.

In one sentence he would put 8 Washington in the same category as $95 million Manhattan penthouses, saying that they would be rarely habitated. Then in the next sentence he would tell you that their cars would add to traffic congestion.

Business is business and I don't think it would have made a difference even if he was Edward Murrow. But he didn't do anything to make the SFBG a useful, informative resource for either side.

Posted by Troll on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:54 am

Rather than perform investigative journalism he was little more than a blogger about the investigative journalism that others sis.

He may have been better when he was younger, and perhaps he was totally demotivated in the last few months.

But either way, the independent vehicle that was once driven by Bruce and Tim is not merely another corporate asset.

And it never really adapted to the internet which, by stealing the SFBG's hooker revenue, left it unviable.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 9:11 am

bits about the people who buy these places and their private jets.

Posted by matlock on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 2:17 pm

He was never allowed to live that down.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 2:50 pm

or Alternative Right, considering his racism and bigotry

Posted by Sawney Beane on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 4:12 pm

that a left-wing extremist like Tim has more in common with a right-wing extremist than he does with, say, a moderate centrist, the silent majority.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 4:33 pm

but I felt such might help balance the rightward tilt that inexorably shifts the center of gravity in all the media and larger world it is supposed to describe.

I had long thought Tim's moderate tendencies reflected an overt willingness to get along with forces which are not the least bit reasonable or honorable;but clearly his departure here shows his core values in a good light.

Best wishes to Tim and all the SFBG crew which remain behind. I've got little doubt that the future holds more tragedies in store -- and perhaps some surprising triumphs. Sometimes in defeat there is truimph too.

Posted by lillipublicans on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:35 am

people also move to the right. Media is, ultimately, responsive to it's readers.

The people get the media and the politicians that they deserve.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:48 am

I was shocked about homelessness in the city when I returned to SF in 1995, but I was even more shocked by the untenable position that the Guardian left took in response to the crisis: endorsing Food Not Bombs and the Biotic Baking Brigade as a valid response---and tacitly supporting the idea of people living on the streets and in Golden Gate Park. Then the Matt Gonzalez versus Newsom campaign, which was really the left's swan song in SF. Newsom was responding to public pressure for the city to do something about homelessness, while Gonzalez talked airily about the "root causes" of homelessness, as if there was little SF could really do about it(Mayor Brown, oddly, took the same tack).

Then there was under Redmond the Guardian's endorsement of graffiti/tagging vandalism as "public art," the bicycle foolishness that still plagues the city, the naked guys in the Castro, "smart growth" and "dense development" and the lack of any Guardian opposition to allowing UC to rip off the old extension property, the Market/Octavia Plan (40-story highrises at Market and Van Ness!), Treasure Island, and Parkmerced---none of this was adequately covered by the Guardian.

Hard to see how bringing in this left-wing windbag from LA---actually, he won't even leave LA!---to post his canned "progressive" twaddle on this blog will help attract readers. Vogt's pledge to continue the Guardian as a "progressive" publication is not encouraging, since SF progressivism continues to be a massive intellectual and political failure.

Posted by Rob Anderson on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 9:59 am

I've been reading your drivel for years! When are you going to lose the SHOCK over 40 stories at market and van ness?
there has been a 400' tall building there since the 60s - another two is going to cause you to have a fit?
Get over it!

Posted by Maldita fondada on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 10:55 am

you might as well build the rest up to the same height, and actually have some more affordable housing.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:27 pm

The SFBG has deteriorated over the years, although it was never more than a liberal publication at best. After all, it has endorsed such enormous hacks as Leland Yee, Fiona Ma and Willie Brown.

Todd Vogt is running the paper straight into the ground! :(

Posted by Richard on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 10:11 am

I didn't always agree with Tim Redmond but he had integrity, a critical perspective, and was a great writer. His last cover story on the regional plan "Planning for displacement" was artfully written and took a sharp 'outsiders' perspective against the mainstream politics of the day. It was a perspective that has been ignored by the Chronicle or Examiner (not to mention the SF Weekly). So much of what else appears as 'criticism' in today's media is more like cynicism.
Losing Tim Redmond is a big loss for the Guardian and for San Francisco.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 11:08 am

If by loss, you mean unmitigated success! Good riddance to bad rubbish!

Posted by Maldita fondada on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 11:10 am

With the departure of Tim Redmond (the ship upon the fucking sea!), this magazine has now entered the realm of vulgarian centrist (Cf. friendly to the establishment) pap.

In honor of Tim, I am burning some ccsf hashplant


Posted by GuestofHonor on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:29 pm

the SFBG simply followed it's audience. Can you blame them? You have to go where the money is, and there isn't much money in being a whiney irritant.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 1:25 pm

That policy never did make any sense as they are no worse than any other company.

After 40 years of trying to get public power, the battle is now officially lost. The people won, by rejecting public power at the polls every time.

All that effort and hot air, for nothing. It may well say that on their tombstones.

Posted by Guest on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 12:36 pm

...killed a bunch of people in the process, provide generally atrocious service, black out whenever it rains, sniff out everything evil in local politics and support it even if it has nothing to do with energy, spend millions of dollars on ill-conceived failed ballot initiatives which should have been spent on fixing their third-world infrastructure, shove smart meters down people's throats without asking them permission so they can gouge people even more...

...other than that, though, they're just hunky dory.

Posted by Greg on Jun. 15, 2013 @ 8:11 pm

Post new comment

The content of this field is kept private and will not be shown publicly.