posted by Will
The papers are also facing loss of ad revenue which seems a huge problem. I have not had any contact with the news business in decades and am no expert, but can say the loss of advertising started with the arrival of TV and has increased with Craiglist and other such sites. The argument about the continued existence of papers is an important one as without them, all we will know what the gov't. decides to tell us. Rusty Limburger and the other radio yellers are ax-grinders and not newspeople.
Also, if you want depth of reporting, the sound bites that sell TV time are not long enough to give you details. Today, one must absolutely have a newspapaper in order to glean a reasonable amount of information about a subject. During the '50'and '60's Charles McCabe Art Hoppe, Art Cohn, Prescott Sullivan, Abe Mellinkoff were guys whose stuff was good.
It may be that John Martini's thought about susbscribing to an online paper might save the situation, but tucking a comupter under your arm while you head for coffee shop just ain't the same.
The other element that seems to be found in fewer numbers is the dedicated newsperson. There was a time when news reporters went at the work like bulldogs and were not the lapdogs of the people they were supposed to be watching.
[ First Message
[ Next Message
[ Previous Message
[ Last Message
[ Back to message list