On August 12th, 2008 at 9:01 am, Blaze said:
On August 11th, 2008 at 6:05 pm, SpeakEasy said:
On August 11th, 2008 at 4:34 pm, Blaze said:

Our nation was built on the free flow of ideas made accessable to the masses by the printing press. It’s sad to see it abandoned instead of revitalized.
Replace ‘printing press’ with ‘the internet’ in the above statement and I believe you will see the folly of your argument.
Actually, the last time I checked, Al Gore had not invented the internet at the time the Federalist Papers were written. The printing press was an important tool in the Revolutionary War, and can be one in the current cultural “war” we are in.

Despite popular belief, there are large segments of the population who do not have access or cannot use the internet to get information – such as the elderly and the poor. And there are segments who do not use the internet to gather information. Yes, times are changing. But it is unfortunate that the newspapers cannot or will not adapt to the times (including throwing out the bias).

Lots of people couldn’t read in the 1780s, but that didn’t stop the 85 essays of the Federalist Papers from circulating. Hell, lots of people can’t read today. This doesn’t mean that we can’t transition more media to non-print sources. How does local TV news do it?

Haha… I remember them. They hired a telemarketing firm that kept calling back “hang-ups” and harrassing them. Ripped us off because they kept delivering after the subscription expired – to a home with a “SOLD” sign next to the paper tube – then DEMANDED money. Bunch of crooks.

Now, I’m gonna date myself here: Back in the 60s, my H.S. english class was given an assignment to write a news article – anything we wanted. The article had to include the four “W”s; Who, What, Where, and When. There was no “how” and DEFINITELY no “Why” back then. “How” just didn’t exist (probably too hard to confirm?) and “Why” was STRICTLY forbidden because it was interpretive. “Why” would result in points off the assignment. Also resulting in points off was any use of connotative words where denotative would do. We were to stick to verifyable facts (4 Ws) and use only descriptive language – keep emotion out of it.

I miss the “National Observer” — went out of print in the mid-seventies. It was a news-weekly on newsprint, no glossy pages, minimal photos, little or no advertising, and all the opinion content was on pages CLEARLY marked opinion. There was more info in that paper than a week’s worth of the local rag.

P.

p.s. My first post here…. thanks M!

On August 11th, 2008 at 6:05 pm, SpeakEasy said:
On August 11th, 2008 at 4:34 pm, Blaze said:

Our nation was built on the free flow of ideas made accessable to the masses by the printing press. It’s sad to see it abandoned instead of revitalized.
Replace ‘printing press’ with ‘the internet’ in the above statement and I believe you will see the folly of your argument.

Actually, the last time I checked, Al Gore had not invented the internet at the time the Federalist Papers were written. The printing press was an important tool in the Revolutionary War, and can be one in the current cultural “war” we are in.

Despite popular belief, there are large segments of the population who do not have access or cannot use the internet to get information – such as the elderly and the poor. And there are segments who do not use the internet to gather information. Yes, times are changing. But it is unfortunate that the newspapers cannot or will not adapt to the times (including throwing out the bias).

I miss my daily “Get Fuzzy”.

What we are witnessing is the market forces working, and the reason these papers are headed for bankruptcy is because their product is mostly worthless.

If the owners really care enough to try to save these institutions of shame filled liberalism they can start by hiring new editors, and those editors can try using more conservative writers.

In a nut shell, they did this to themselves, and it is up to them to correct their mistakes.

I hardly think so. We still need the old time hard reporting provided only by those with physical buildings, paper, locations and reporters.

von Rum

I do think that there may be a place for Michelle Malkin, Pajamas Media, Townhall etc. and others to associate in some way to develop real reporting capacity. The network needs to grow. I am not so worried about the national scene for now but I do think that there are severe threats to democratic government in our cities and local governments brought on by a dearth of real reporting.