Hi, I work in journalism here and know a bunch of current and ex LA Times employees. What you imagine happening in the LA Times building couldn't be further from the truth.

LA times may have overstepped their leverage with Disney but I guarantee you they bend over backwards for sponsors.

The Times maintains a strict firewall with their advertising department. This not only means that advertisers have no influence over coverage - Times editors and reporters don't find out who their advertisers are until the rest of do: when the paper is printed and the ads run. If you were a fly on the wall at the Times you'd find a bunch of overworked, exhausted people pissed off at their bosses and trying to file their story quickly so they can get home before dinner for a change.

And yes, this includes arts and culture writers, too.

The Times can be sloppy and weird sometimes, its columnists can have awful opinions, but good or bad - advertising doesn't inform their coverage.

This kind of thing happens frequently but considering the loss of access for LA times and it being such a huge company that is in their backyard they've now gone to the bully pulpit in an attempt to have readers engage Disney to reverse their decision.

This is barely a sentence but to try to go point by point:

1) You said this happens frequently - name all the other times this has happened? The story has gone national because it's a uniquely dumb decision on Disney's part.

2) The Times didn't go to the bully pulpit - they published a small coverage note advising readers why their Disney reviews would be late. You act like they took out a giant column calling out Disney.