It's a strangely schizophrenic and defensive piece of propaganda, and probably not even worth addressing - but here I go.
Romero argues that "what's seen as a reduction of the editorial department is also a changing of the guard." That the new owners reduced the staff of the editorial department by more than half is not a perception - it's a fact. Romero should note all the empty cubicles around him in the Weekly office. Furthermore, the freelance budget has been slashed and the paper's page count has shrunk.
The mention of "old white guys" is similarly baffling. The "Weekly of yesteryear" was run by a Latina woman - who was fired and replaced with an old white guy. The staff of the LA Weekly at the time it was acquired by the new owners had more religious, cultural and ethnic diversity than the one today. There were more women. More homosexuals. Not that there's anything wrong with being an old white guy. It's just inaccurate to characterize that demographic as having been the dominant voice of the paper: a "crusty, bell-bottom voice," according to Romero, in stark contrast to the "bright and digital" era he lauds as the paper's future.
The real truth is that the changes at the LA Weekly are not nearly so radical, nor so black-and-white. While the paper has changed, it has hardly been reborn - or destroyed.
Barely related: Romero has a post today on the DA deciding not to file DUI charges on Alexandra Kerry, since her blood alcohol level apparently came back under the legal limit.