The Newspaper...a hunk a junk

[realFedUp]

I've stopped taking the big city newspaper, as good
as it used to be. Now it's full of stories that I'm not
that interested in reading. It's half full of advertising,
most of which I'm not interested in buying.

It's a lot of paper, thrown in the recycling bin, off
to somewhere there's too much of.

I know we are going through a transition...will we
pay for online information, reporting, ads?
We're not going to pay now for anything we don't
really need.

There are a lot of smart people reporting stuff we do
need to know....laws, what will be law and if our
representatives are actually working for us or for
the people who pay them to run.

[realFedUp]

1. Howabout if we pay for the columnists who work for us....

I'd pay for Paul Krugman, Thom Hartmann, Mike Malloy,
Rachel Maddow, even K.O, inflated as his salary is.
I'd pay for those people to keep talking, for their staffs
to keep investigating. It's a sad fact that even at the
large salaries they earn, we depend on their research
and reporting, as ineffectual as it seems to be to our
representatives.

[Brickbat]

4. An excellent online "newspaper," MinnPost.com, does just that with some of its

columnists. They got quite a good response with a "dribs and drabs" fundraiser for one columnist who set the maximum donation at, IIRC, $25.

Good reporting will always cost money. People can talk about citizen journalists (HURL!) all they want, but the point of a good, strong, independent news source is that it has the resources and abilities and respect to go places and learn things everyday people can't.

[HughBeaumont]

2. The Cleveland PD has turned into the NewsPamphlet.

Raise the costs, fire workers, lower the number of pages. The damned thing is so light and filled with giant bank ads it's ridiculous.

[femmocrat]

3. I hope we never have to pay for online information!

I know it has been rumored for a long time, but I believe the internet should stay FREE. Our local paper is a right wing rag and I really depend on progressive internet sites for the "truth".

Although -- I did hear recently that some papers would be charging a subscription fee for their online editions. I hope it doesn't happen.

[realFedUp]

5. I can sympathize with that notion

but something has to give...and we need the correct information,
whether we pay for it via reporters in print or
who will report just online. I would hate to lose
good reporting just because we won't pay for the
way it's delivered.

[realFedUp]

6. and btw, let's talk about MoDo

Why is it that she still has a job in a large newspaper...Habit?
or something else. Yeah, she uses obtuse words sprinkled
throughout her columns. That makes her right? No, just obtuse.

She has unfortunately influenced political races in this country,
not for the better. She's not her better angel or ours.

[slampoet]

7. "36-hour-old news printed on a dead tree."

I haven't heard a more scathing critique than that.

[realFedUp]

8. yeah....even 5 months old in some cases....sad for the trees. nt

[dysfunctional press]

9. when my stack of newspaper is gone- i don't know how i'm going to light the fireplace...

junkmail? :shrug:

[L0oniX]

10. But it is the perfect size for the bottom of my bird cages.

[1]

11. yeah, journalism is deader than dead. now we get the melodrama and hyperbole of blogs to replace it.

good times...

[Fading Captain]

12. Don't become ignorant

Newspapers are filled with talented writers, editors and photographers. And despite the restraints of corporate news, those people do an important service.
I stopped getting the local paper for awhile, and started reading for free on the paper's website.
But I found I missed the way the newspaper's prioritized the news. I found I was becoming more and more ignorant about local news.
So I am subscribing again.