Chronicle Renewal: A Bridge Too Far

Yesterday we noted how we preferred the San Francisco Chronicle to the San Jose Mercury News.

Three years ago we wrote about how the Chronicle reminded us of the nearly forgotten pleasure of reading a newspaper front to back:

After getting off the airplane, I sent my renewal payment to the Chronicle. Yes, its politics are different from mine, and yes, it's become increasingly partisan over the past decade, but there's enough in the venerable newspaper that's worth saving.

The Chronicle does a fairly good job of separating the news and opinion sections. It does factual reporting that is often critical of State and City policies (e.g., homelessness, wildfires, property crimes, etc.) that are supported by the editorial board.

However, we will not re-up our subscription, at least for now.

Price hikes on a 1-yr. subscription have been astounding, especially for a product whose paying customers are melting away:

2017 - $259.20
2018 - $358.80
2019 - $431.60
2020 - $514.80 (prospective)

I totally disagree with the Chronicle's editorial position in favor of Proposition 16, which would repeal 1996's Proposition 209. Prop. 209 stated that

the government and public institutions cannot discriminate against or grant preferential treatment to persons on the basis of race, sex, color, ethnicity, or national origin in public employment, public education, and public contracting.

Proposition 16 would bring back affirmative action. The Chronicle justified its position by citing "systemic racism":

However, the national reckoning about systemic racism in the criminal justice system — forced by the horrific deaths of George Floyd and Breonna Taylor and wounding of Jacob Blake at the hands of police — has elevated concerns about the reality on the streets. It’s absolutely legitimate for law enforcement to consider the life experience of men and women it is hiring to interface with the public.

None of those well-publicized shootings occurred in California, and while California law enforcement is far from perfect, I don't see why problems occurring in other states are a reason for striking fundamental tenets of civil rights from the State constitution.

And we're not even getting into "systemic racism" and "critical race theory", ideas that are remarkable for their imprecision and irrefutability.

I'll put up with a lot to support one of the last remnants of journalism in the Bay Area, but to pay dramatically more to finance editorial positions that I totally disagree with is a bridge too far.