Many years ago, my Aunt Rita decided to return to her childhood neighborhood in Brooklyn. Thomas Wolfe wrote that you can’t go home again — but, really, sometimes you just shouldn’t. 

At that time, New Lots Avenue wasn’t looking very new. Any number of the erstwhile mom ‘n’ pop shops had crumbled into disrepair. Vagrants had taken over many of them, which were illuminated from within by trash-can fires. 

It was a profoundly dispiriting sight. 

In related news, SF Weekly’s owners on Friday announced they are pulling the plug on the paper indefinitely. San Francisco, a realm of unfettered inequality and obliviousness and corruption — perhaps the city that most needs a robust and functional alt-weekly newspaper — will now have exactly zero. 

We live in a profoundly dispiriting place. But we’re not alone: Alt-weeklies are melting away like polar ice across the country, and in Canada, too. Every time another one disappears, it’s a Kurt Cobain moment: You’re shocked, but not surprised. 

And, of course, you’re dispirited. But what’s perhaps even more dispiriting than the death of yet another alt-weekly was its painful demise. The edifice had become hollowed out, and glowed from within. But what was burning wasn’t trash, but the paper’s legacy and its overworked talent. 

Let’s be clear: The decline and fall of SF Weekly was not due to the shortcomings of the writers and editors who worked there. The publication punched above its weight even when its staffing numbers began to less mirror those of a newspaper and more closely resemble some manner of cruel and punitive experiment regarding workforce exhaustion, depletion and burnout. 

When your humble narrator was a contributing SF Weekly writer in 2007 — prior to serving as a staff writer from 2008-15 — the printed paper managed to frequently crack 100 pages, a plateau soon only possible for a yearly “Best of SF” edition (when reporters were told to, for a week, stop being critical). But, even then, it was clear that the 1990s to early-to-mid 2000s Golden Era of SF Weekly, before Craigslist et al. vivisected this and every newspaper’s profitability, was like a train: You could see it getting smaller as it pulled away.

And yet, the edition was an inch thick damn-near every week, the masthead was chock-full of seasoned writers and editors and contributors being paid living wages, and classified-ad revenue continued to flow like comped Peroni at a Christmas party.  

In my time at SF Weekly, writers faced increasing privations and were increasingly unable to focus on the lengthy, exhaustively reported cover stories that were SF Weekly’s stock and trade — or were out doing the reporting on evenings after a day chasing their blog quota in the office. Layoffs and attrition hollowed out the paper; the general demise of print media reduced it from a hefty tome to something resembling the book order forms those of a certain age remember being handed in first grade. We were, with every cutback, told to do more with less. 

As Rocky would put it, that trick never works

Your humble narrator worked at SF Weekly under three ownership regimes (but not the present owners). I can tell you that it is profoundly dispiriting for journalists trained to ferret out horse shit from public officials to be fed horse shit by their managers — regarding the paper’s editorial direction and finances.

In my tenure there, writers grew younger, because older (read: more experienced, more costly) workers were jettisoned. Increasing demands made of a depleted workforce were not, to put it mildly, family friendly. Staff and freelance payments didn’t just fail to keep up with inflation, they flat-out dropped, and significantly. Quality journalists decamped for better paychecks or a more stable work atmosphere. 

And yet writers continued to show up. And many of them did good work, because journalists can be held hostage by their ideals and aspirations and dreams. And management knew this. 

So, we are all poorer for not having a functional alt-weekly in town. And not merely because more professional journalists and more credible outlets is better than fewer. But because alt-weeklies, specifically, best understood how a city worked — or did not work. That’s not to say that reporters working at dailies don’t know these things, but it was only at alt-weeklies that reporters were granted the editorial freedom to print the most unvarnished and deeply reported articles about city life, culture, government, etc. We were not, for lack of a better term, beholden to “newspaper-ese.” 

Reporters elsewhere often share the real story with their colleagues over a drink after work. At an alt-weekly, the real story was the story in the paper. This was a deeply, deeply satisfying way of working and far less common than you’d hope for.

Alt-weekly reporters, as I told the Chronicle, do not play by the “niceties of daily journalism.”

The second half of that quote was, “you don’t give equal time to bullshit.” Now, I think this was a good article written by a talented reporter; don’t get me wrong. But the second half of the quote not being included in the daily newspaper of record definitely underscores the point. 

In much the same way that podcasters are now producing serial fiction podcasts — which, a century ago, used to just be called “radio shows” — other publications have belatedly “rediscovered” the long-form, narrative, deeply reported style that, again, was an alt-weekly’s  stock and trade.

That’s great. But SF Weekly produced these sorts of stories not as a special occasion or a one-off, but on a weekly basis. San Francisco is not only not being reported on with anything near the vigor it was in the past, it isn’t being covered as thoroughly or by reporters with the institutional memories of their forebears. 

So, that’s gone. And that’s a shame. San Francisco remains a deeply corrupt and dysfunctional place. But also a profoundly ephemeral one, in which residents, confronted with this city’s bizarre, established practices, no longer have an easy means of learning that the same problems and predicaments — often involving the very same people — are longstanding. 

It is, increasingly, a struggle to merely tread water in this town. Nobody has time to take a breath anymore. Including, in the end, the journalists. 

And it’s a shame that young journalists won’t even be able to read alt-weekly papers anymore, let alone work at one. There is no substitute for the editorial freedom accorded an alt-weekly reporter; there is no substitute for the emphasis placed on to-the-point truth-telling, deep reportage, and writing with panache. 

Not only will young people not be afforded this incomparable training ground, they won’t even know this type of reporting existed. Journalism, already too much the province of people who can work badly paid (or unpaid) internships and spend a fortune for a graduate school degree —  for which a few years at an alt-weekly was a far more economical substitution — will grow ever more exclusive. 

I do not have to like the decision made by SF Weekly’s present owners, but I do understand it. The present state of the paper was not of their making. They have assured the public they’re redoubling their efforts to revive the Examiner — and have, indeed, made many new hires. They have said they will not let the Weekly’s archives disappear down the memory hole, which would be a travesty. 

Locally, we’ve reached yet another journalistic nadir. But while we may be dispirited and diminished, we’re not done. Not yet. This and other publications appreciate your readership and support. 

Because, while you may not be able to go home again, some of us never left. 

Follow Us

Managing Editor/Columnist. Joe was born in San Francisco, raised in the Bay Area, and attended U.C. Berkeley. He never left.

“Your humble narrator” was a writer and columnist for SF Weekly from 2007 to 2015, and a senior editor at San Francisco Magazine from 2015 to 2017. You may also have read his work in the Guardian (U.S. and U.K.); San Francisco Public Press; San Francisco Chronicle; San Francisco Examiner; Dallas Morning News; and elsewhere.

He resides in the Excelsior with his wife and three (!) kids, 4.3 miles from his birthplace and 5,474 from hers.

The Northern California branch of the Society of Professional Journalists named Eskenazi the 2019 Journalist of the Year.

Join the Conversation


Please keep your comments short and civil. Do not leave multiple comments under multiple names on one article. We will zap comments that fail to adhere to these short and very easy-to-follow rules.

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

  1. Terrific piece! As one of the founding editors of the Seattle Weekly, I remember all the best journalism of the early days of alternative weeklies, especially the SFW and the BG. Their rise and fall is a great topic for a book – one that would highlight the best stories of that era, from coast to coast . Maybe by someone like this you, Joe

  2. At 66, I can remember when there were various morning and evening daily newspapers here, even worked at one. But the biggest disaster here was Hearst Corp buying The Chronicle, a clear sign of the end of local journalism. That the Bay Guardian and now the SF Weekly could not hold on is no surprise.

  3. Joe, I’ve passed your piece on to an old friend back on the East coast who once worked on SF Weekly.

  4. When I was starting out as a young illustrator I moved from NYC to Oakland and illustrated regularly for the SF Weekly, Guardian and EB Express (and other alts around the country such as Village Voice etc). Watching them dry up and disappear over the years is so sad. I didn’t even realize the SF Weekly was still around.

  5. The best part of SF Weekly (and The Bay Guardian for that matter) was eating brunch at Just For You Cafe with my week’s edition spread out over the pancakes. Reading sex advice as maple syrup soaked up through the “massage” ads.

  6. Your article inspired a donation (small, but what I could – transaction 463285 so you know it’s not just got air) to mission local. Thanks!

  7. Let’s be clear: The decline and fall of SF Weekly was not due to the shortcomings of the writers and editors who worked there.

    As one of those writers – one who’d just had his cover story published – the above is a nice thing to hear. And, as someone born ‘n raised in SF, I’ll keep writing about home as long as it exists.

    1. Great article by Charles Lewis III.
      One hopes this level of journalism continues to survive or even thrive in the very near future. It’s the blood and soul of San Francisco.

      And yes – Steve’s comment regarding Joe and his work rings loud and clear:
      “I speak for the vast majority reading your work when I say that we’re all pulling for you”

  8. I would humbly argue that SF Weekly’s “golden era” began in the late 90s.
    — Respectfully, former SF Weekly Account Executive and office lothario, 1996-2001.

      1. Matt — 

        Since I was actually thinking of you when dating the heyday, I’ll admit I got the date wrong and change it.


  9. God-f*cking-dammit. Another one bites the dust. I really, really miss the old SF Weekly and the SFBG. I miss those outstanding pieces by writers like Hiya Swanhyuser and Cintra Wilson. I’m so glad you’re still around and still doing terrific work, Joe — but, yeah, it’s a terrible shame to no longer have any alt-weeklies in SF.

  10. Man. What a g’d drag. I moved to The City in 2007 and was previously familiar with both the Weekly and SFBG before getting here, but there was a special kind of excitement about getting off work on a Wednesday, grabbing a copy of each of the weeklies, and then catching a solid buzz at the local watering hole paging through them both. Concert listings, art reviews, letters to the editor, all of it was great but then you’d get hit upside the head with an article that would make your head spin – We spend *HOW MUCH* on cable cars?!? – or – Willie Brown is getting away with whaaaat?!
    Damn. What a loss.

  11. I have been around long enough to have experienced both the SF Weekly and The Bay Guardian. While I did not always agree with the stance on issues, I admired them for their perseverance and because they were not wholly owned subsidiaries of the corrupt City government. Matter &Ross talked a good game and Andy Ross was a decent investigative reporter (Matier was, is and ever shall be overrated). But they were captives of the system. And once Willie Brown came in, the system was all that mattered. It was left to the alts to do the real investigative reporting and actually publish what they found. Now, they are no more.

    Joe, I admired your writing for The Weekly and I admire it here. You seem to be the last journalist standing in this city that can actually shine a light on the corruption and that is a great responsibility to lay on one person’s shoulders. I think I speak for the vast majority reading your work when I say that we’re all pulling for you.