Can't the LA Times get ANYTHING right?

Once upon a time there existed in Los Angeles a newspaper that actually wrote about the people of Los Angeles and provided the information the people of Los Angeles wanted to know about their lives and their city. Once upon a time the LA Times was run by people who had lived in this city more than a few years and had columnists and reporters who actually knew about and cared about this city.

Once upon a time the front page of the sports section actually had the standings of the local teams so one could start off by seeing where the teams stood before delving into the rest of the section. Once upon a time there actually was a Metro section that actually had stories about the City of Los Angeles.

But, of course, it was too much to expect for any of this to continue.

But - is it totally unreasonable to ask that the TV section actually tell us what is on TV during all the hours of each day?

Is it to much to expect that the weekly TV Guide - inadequate as it is - actually be included in the Sunday Times - which it was not the last two weeks I purchased the paper?

Is it too much to expect the newspaper to actually give even the most basic information about the weather during record setting storms? I mean - how hard is it to have a little column that says how much rain we have had during this storm, how much we have had so far this year - and how much last year?

I guess it is. And I would ask other people if they, too, miss these little things, but no one I know (at least among those under 65) actually reads the LA Times - even the very few I know who subscribe to it.