Advertisement

Opinion: Unless it’s the ‘90s again, readers don’t want to see O.J. Simpson on The Times’ front page

O.J. Simpson reacts after learning he was granted parole at Lovelock Correctional Center in Lovelock, Nevada, on July 20.
(Pool / Getty Images)
Share

Los Angeles gave the world O.J. Simpson and everything that came with him — the slow-speed Bronco chase, televised celebrity trials, the Kardashians. And judging by the letters written in response to Friday’s front-page report on Simpson being granted parole in Nevada, L.A. is sick of him.

Perhaps that has to do with the fact that his murder trial in 1995, which resulted in his acquittal, involved real events and people in Los Angeles, including Simpson’s slain ex-wife and her acquaintance and a police department accused of racism. Many of us had our fill of Simpson in the 90s, and some Times letter writers would rather not read about him if they don’t have to.

Villa Park resident Donald K. Wise gets straight to the point:

Advertisement

It is totally inappropriate for you to put the story of Simpson’s parole on the front page. It is not newsworthy. This is trash journalism at its worst.

This is beneath The Times. I am very disappointed.

When Simpson is paroled from prison this fall, he can get a job and finally start paying off the $33 million he owes.

— Michael Duffy, Simi Valley

Victoria Phillips of San Diego expresses concern for the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman:

How disgusting to open my paper this morning to a front-page article and large photo of Simpson. I can only imagine how the families of the two people who were killed in 1994 must feel.

I feel sickened by the publicity this man has garnered. It seems celebrity overrules conscience and good taste.

Los Angeles resident Jon Merritt objects to the exhaustive coverage of Simpson’s parole hearing:

Advertisement

They say lightning never strikes the same place twice. I beg to differ.

No matter what TV channel I tuned to on Thursday, I was subjected to another “slow-speed chase,” with seemingly endless hours-long live coverage of the Simpson parole hearing.

Why was this soap opera considered all-important breaking news, preempting the real soap operas?

Manhattan Beach resident Neil Snow clarifies what Simpson’s original murder trial was all about:

In an article Thursday previewing Simpson’s Nevada parole hearing, The Times took journalistic liberties and put its own spin on the 1995 murder trial.

The trial itself was not about race, as the article indicates. It was a trial about a double homicide. The acquittal may have been influenced by race, but the trial itself was not about that.

Warren Cereghino of Pacific Palisades says Simpson’s case proves there’s a difference between the law and justice:

Advertisement

When the Nevada parole board declined to factor in anything of Simpson’s legal history in California, it proved once again that there is no justice, there is only the law. Oh, and celebrity worship.

Simi Valley resident Michael Duffy encourages Simpson to pay up:

When Simpson is paroled from prison this fall, he can get a job and finally start paying off the $33 million he owes the families of Nicole Brown Simpson and Ron Goldman.

Follow the Opinion section on Twitter @latimesopinion and Facebook

Advertisement