Reply #89: Don't be pessimistic - we can do this - without George Soros maybe!

[scottxyz]

We have content - thousands of great articles already written.

We have the equipment - thousands of computers and laser printers, along with page-layout software that can easily be used to put together a newspaper.

Go to your local grocery store or laundromat or bar and look at how many rags and newsletters are all over the place. Many are badly produced - irrelevant writing (either trivial vanity pieces by a small cadre of "publishers" - or thinly-disguised corporate advertising).

But they are PRODUCED - by amateurs, by people with a computer and a laser printer and access to a xerox or a printing press. This is America - this equipment is all over the place.

Think back to earlier examples of publishing that changed history: Thomas Paine, Benjamin Franklin - they were pretty brilliant thinkers, but they were also in the right place at the right time, smart to capitalize on newly available technologies for "getting the word out".

Think back to communist Russia - where xerox machines were BANNED - and people still got their underground samizdat newspapers out by hand-typing them on typwriters with carbon paper - typos and all. Now that's passion!

We don't need George Soros to print up the same kinds of brochures and Chinese takeout menus and newsletters that clog most of our mailboxes and doorsteps and are stacked up all over our laundromats and in our supermarkets!

= = =

The ONLY thing that's missing so far is a way of saying "These are the ten stories we want to run this week." Not because there's no stories written up - but because there's TOO many stories out there!*

We just need to use the web to take a national vote on which stories to run. The rest is just plain old-fashioned page-layout, xeroxing/printing and distribution.


= = =

* Remember that sometimes when there's TOO MANY choices, people feel overwhelmed. Social scientists have confirmed this by going into a supermarket with free samples of chocolate, for example. In one test, there will be 5 types of chocolate to sample - in another test there will be 50 types.

The results? In the smaller test, people not only had an easier time picking their favorite (that's obvious) but they RATED THEIR FAVORITE HIGHER than in the bigger test.

This might be called the "looking over your shoulder" or "the grass is always greener" syndrome. When people are confronted with TOO MANY choices, they get overwhelmed, and NONE of the choices look that great. When there are fewer choices, choosing on is easier - and people report being MORE SATISFIED with that choice. Ironic, but true.