You can sell limited use licensing so you retain the copyright. It is actually pretty rare for a photographer to sell a copyright.
But most small papers won't pay for photos anyway and the NY Times couldn't care less about any small town flyover country parade. There is just so little leverage on the side of the photographer that most just want named credit to show their work to those who may pay.
A photographer at Michigan speedway told me he spent 20 years photographing cars and drivers for small tracks before Sports Illustrated started contracting him for big money.
However, I'll never not be angry at what liberalism has done to photography and the arts overall.