In Keeping With Our Theme…
March 25th, 2009 at 8:35 am by Preston Taylor HolmesSenator Benjamin Douchebag Cardin wants to take some of that magical unicorn money that flows forth from the Obamessiah’s ass and bail out the newspaper industry. Yet another horrible idea from a Congress overflowing with them.
Under this arrangement, newspapers would still be free to report on all issues, including political campaigns. But they would be prohibited from making political endorsements.
Never mind that their collective bias drips off the pages like so much bird squeeze. They rarely make official political endorsements – they don’t have to, because they frame the news in such a fashion that handles that task already.
Heaven forfend we should lose one of the reliable arms of the DNC!
It’s called economic suicide, Cardin. Something in which you and your bosses are already engaged.
Step aside and let the papers continue to kill themselves. I’ll send them some dead flowers for the memorial service.
March 25th, 2009 at 9:46 am
Newspapers are dying because 1) they no longer have that “first on the scene” angle anymore. If we want to know about how people are faring after a hurricane in Texas for instance, we can just send out a tweet or check the blogs and practically be in the kitchen sweeping up glass with them. 2) If a person has a complaint or comment, he has to send it to the editor, then the editor decides if it’s worthy to print (or suits his agenda). On the internet its a 24 hour round table discussion where everybody gets to make their point and they don’t have to have any “credentials” to do it. 3)In the past before the internet, a story was printed in the paper and that was it. Maybe next week there would be more about it, but there weren’t really many resources for digging in. The internet is a candy store of links and references and information. We no longer have to be ignorant.
On the internet we don’t have to wait for our news to come late. For it to come from some magical man behind the curtain, and it isn’t predigested.
So why the hell do any trees need to be sacrificed for newspaper journalists these days?
March 25th, 2009 at 10:44 am
All good points and relevant.
And you would think all the environmentalists would want to shut their papers down forthwith to save a tree for Gaia.
March 25th, 2009 at 10:50 am
Good post, Preston.
You can’t deny that some professional reporters are worth their wages and that in some cases a reporter by virtue of credentials can gain access where an “ordinary blogger” cannot. No biggie there. So while papers may die, reporters will stick around -if- publishers figure it out in time.
I believe that the future of newspapers will follow two major branches. This is after the print version dies forever. Electronic is the future, which they are the last to figure out, apparently.
One will be that newspapers will evolve into more of a Time/Newsweek format where the articles are longer but still split the difference between where they used to be and where the bigger publication “magazines” are. The reporting cycle will have to be somewhere in the middle of the road as well.
Secondly, and this will require serious effort on their part – they will have to evolve into entities that are more purely factual -AND- accredited or vetted (or perhaps there is a better word) in such a way as to show a greater level of professionalism and veracity than we’ve seen. An example of poor news is Dan
Rather and CBS, but this is hardly unique and this attitude has roots all through news organizations. Hell, poor and unreliable news yet another reason why Bloggers took off with a bang.
Ever watch the Walter K. broadcasts from the Kennedy Cuban Missile Crisis? That was factual. It was a very marked difference. If papers were to report who/what/where/why/when in a direct fashion, I’d be willing to pay good money to subscribe to a site. But when the reporter tries to get artistic or displays the information in a jumbled fashion… well, who has time for that?
March 25th, 2009 at 11:04 am
LK, obviously, there are exceptions to every rule. I like to give our readers credit by not stating the obvious. I think you’re right about there being a need for the longer, in-depth pieces that some journalists do a great job with. I hope you’re right about a return to factual reporting instead of a machine that frames, regurgitates and results in the publishing of the Rahm Emanuel Bullshit Talking Points Daily.
March 25th, 2009 at 11:08 am
The good journalists will survive. They will probably have a bigger podium because the informed will seek them out, and will be able to connect with them like never before. They will be able to generate their own advertising. It’s a beneficial situation for individuals, just not good for papers.
March 25th, 2009 at 11:17 am
Whups. Sorry to state the obvious. Diarrhea of the mouth at times.
Just heard Diane Rhem on the radio and it was nauseating how all the sycophants were slavering all over how totally bodaciously awesomely amazing their man was last night with one slam-dunk fist-bump after another.
He still used a prompter. So there.
Just had to throw that in.
March 25th, 2009 at 12:16 pm
I thought he sounded like he was drowning and grasping for a life preserver. I couldn’t make sense out of anything he said, except the snarky remark he made about liking to know what he’s talking about before he speaks, which was followed by a smirk and a dismissal of the reporter.
March 25th, 2009 at 12:36 pm
I know that smirk. I loathe that smirk.
Bones blacken, blood boils, and skin crawls.
March 25th, 2009 at 2:20 pm
No need, Lemur. I wasn’t taking a shot at you. Sometimes I leave stuff out just because I assume they don’t need to be said. Probably not a good idea most of the time. Assuming too much and what not.
I passed 3 tent cities between my office and Cedar Bluff just now. I think that Ebony reporter was really onto something.
March 25th, 2009 at 2:49 pm
Without the San Diego Cage Liner, how am I supposed to get my Manufacturer’s Coupons??? And my NYT Crossword??? And my Jumble??? And those Obituaries???