True, but the integrated editions I mentioned are published seven days a week. Which may mean something in the future. Or not.
I wonder how many people here on a regular basis a) actually read USA Today; b) actually read their home town newspaper. Most of you seem to be going on 30-year-old jokes. And as bmasters1 notes, there are only a handful of high quality newspapers left in the country. Most small papers are terrible and USA Today is an improvement.
There is room in the industry for something between the New York Times and the local high school sports scores rag. USA Today is not a bad compromise in today’s newspaper reality. I’d hope that we didn’t have to rely upon it as the sole source of news, but I assure everyone that most people in the U.S. can do worse and are.
Previous thread on the subject.
The USA Today vending machines have been/are being removed to my knowledge, and the paper is depending on newstand sales/hotel distribution - which seems insane (how do you sell ads when your circulation numbers take such a big immediate hit)? The guess is that they’re awkwardly transitioning to an online presence, which comes across as committing suicide to avoid eventual death by natural causes.
As for the sneering about what a bad paper it is - if you look at what many traditional metro papers have shrunk to in recent years, USA Today carries as much or more news and features. As noted it has always had a good sports section, and it does have occasional valuable news features (like the recent one on cancer clinic “maverick” Stan Burzynski.
I used to pick up USA Today several times a week (we regularly read two other newspapers); now it’s down to once a week. Great business model ya got there, guys.