In fact, I can't say anything on this because they don't even let me read their privacy policy. They've simply blocked all European visitors since last May (!).
I agree it's a good practice, and one not unrelated to how NPR is one of the few news orgs with a good API [0]. Tribune Media, meanwhile, has had a different saga since 2005 to put it lightly, and it includes the industry's most epic failed mergers and reorgs [1]. I'm not privy to their internal development process, but I'm willing to bet that their lack of a GDPR site is much more about being unable to do so due to corporate/financial chaos, and less so because of a purported hatred toward "people's basic rights to privacy".
NPR is a national news source. Thr LA times is just a local paper, one of about a half dozen the Tribune owns. I do not think they ever aspired to have a global prescence, much less actively serve the EU market.
Whats wrong with a local press deciding to stay local, and only comply with local laws?
Countries/Unions are free to make new regulatory laws. It doesn't mean everyone will, or necessarily should, play along. I don't have a problem with companies changing where they decide to do business based on new laws that pop up. Maybe the EU just isn't a large enough part of LA Times revenue to justify the cost of implementing GDPR. Regardless of the reason, it's their choice, just like it's the EU's choice to pass the regulations. What's the issue?
