Print news is dying, and we shouldn’t kid ourselves that the Internet will somehow replace it. In the last week alone, the 150-year-old Rocky Mountain News folded and the San Francisco Chronicle was talking about a possible bankruptcy. Nearly every large paper in the country could be gone within three to five years. The trend is unstoppable, and it threatens to drastically limit the quality and variety of news that we receive and have come to depend on each day. Many Americans evidently think they’ll be able to get their news from the Web and that the death of newspapers is no big deal. In fact, it is a very big deal, since nearly all of the news published online is gathered and written the old-fashioned way – i.e., by a vast, global network of reporters employed by brick-and-mortar newspapers. That network has been dwindling rapidly, however, and it is unlikely the casualties will ever be replaced. In order to save on newsprint costs, newspapers have been shrinking to survive. That leaves less space for news, reducing the need for reporters. As a result, it is now almost impossible for journalism-school graduates or even veteran reporters to find work.
We have many friends in journalism, having worked as a reporter and editor from 1971-78. One of them searched extensively for a managing editor’s job, finally landing a spot with a small paper in the Midwest. This man had talent and experience to burn, including a stint running a bureau for the Associated Press. But even with his excellent professional connections, it took him six years to get hired. Another friend of ours, a top state-house reporter and Pulitzer winner, recently took a buy-out from the troubled Newark Star-Ledger to work for the state treasurer. And a third, also a Pulitzer winner, got the news recently that his employer, the Philadelphia Inquirer, was considering bankruptcy.
Viagra Will Rule
With newspapers facing imminent extinction, some who should know better still don’t get it. One bloviator we would single out is Colorado Rep. Jared Polis, who made hundreds of millions of dollars building, then selling, the web-based greeting card company Blue Mountain. “When we [ask], Who killed the Rocky Mountain News? we’re all part of it, for better or worse, and, I argue, it’s mostly for the better,” Polis told a local gathering. An ultra left-wing Boulder Democrat, Polis evidently thinks the Web offers a more supportive environment than newspapers for the tide of progressivism: “We can’t just kill [the newspapers] and walk away,” he said. “It’s important for all of us to reach out to some of those…on the other side and present the progressive point of view.” God help us if Polis is a harbinger of Obamanation and the perfection of web-based politics. His words put one in mind of Paddy Chayefsky’s characterization of television as democracy at its ugliest. No argument on that one. But democracy could grow still uglier on the Web, which, to borrow from Chayefsky, is Globalization at its most superficial and hedonistic – a world willing and eager to be hijacked by Russian porn merchants, E! celebrity-worship, Viagra purveyors, and Nigerian spammers.
Shallow Coverage
Of course, news won’t die with the newspapers. But in the hands of the broadcasters there will be much less of it: Coverage will be superficial and shallow, and it will shade increasingly toward infotainment. Broadcasters will expand into the void left by newspapers, growing their revenues by podcasting and streaming news to mobile devices. But this will be a pale substitute for the news, particularly local, that we have always received on our doorstep. Unfortunately, no newspaper has figured out how to profit from giving away news online. There are revenues to be had, but they barely support the bandwidth costs, let alone the huge expense of maintaining the ability to gather and report the news.
Meanwhile, anyone who uses Google’s news page should be appalled at the extent to which a single purveyor of news, Reuters, has become the dominant supplier. It would appear that competitors are dying off fast, unable to match Reuters’ ubiquity. Reporters are about to go the way of blacksmiths, and with them our eyes and ears on the world. Craig’s List (for Pete’s sake!) has supplanted the classified ads that once anchored newspaper profits. We fear the day when all news will come to us in sound bites.
(If you’d like to have Rick’s Picks commentary delivered free each day to your e-mail box, click here.)
Next Hidden Pivot Seminar: June 6th-7th
Save $50 when you register before May 25. Coupon code 7D5629
{ 19 comments }
Rick, I find nothing to disagree with in you comment on the decline of newpapers but my perspective is from the other end of the news chain, the delivery of the papers. My own view is that mismanagement by national new corporations are a substantial contributing factor. My son was a hauler for a Gannett paper for the past 4 years and I often assisted him. Although their reporters are good, the lack of attention to detail in the management of the other facets of their business is appalling. One example: After three revised 1099 forms for his 2008 driving, they still did not get his compensation correct on the fourth one. Each showed different amounts but, the first varied from the last by 39%. If they can’t keep track of something as simple as how much they have paid their contractors, how can they keep track of how much the corporation is earning?
I live in Canada and the corporation which owns most of the large newspapers is about to declare bankruptcy or be bought out. Its newspapers are so poor that not many will care. Advertisements and pop culture with little in depth coverage of anything.
Maybe, like governments, people get the newspapers they deserve.
“We fear the day when all news comes to us in sound bites.”
You mean like it does here on your blog?
%%%%
Not sure if I catch your drift, Jim (from Virginia?). Try again, and if you say something that is halfway intelligent and inoffensive, I might let it pass. RA
On the other hand, these newspapers are almost ALL slanted, purveyors of Left-wing crap. Virtually every political story in a US newspaper comes complete with this damaging slant.
Sorry, I can only say “good riddance” to this pack of inky-fingered parasites who insist on pushing the Collectivist agenda at every possible opportunity.
%%%%%
Interesting point, Jim. It is true that most newspapers really are slanted purveyors of left-wing crap, and, politics aside, most local papers are so bad they barely deserve to exist. But in the end, I wind up thinking it’s better to have a local leftist rag that can’t even spell words right in the headlines (i.e., The Boulder Camera) than no newspaper at all. I’m not sure how I’ll feel when the New York Times goes down. It would be nice to have Paul Krugman and Frank Rich gone from our lives, but then, there’s that great Science and Technology section every week. RA
Indeed, the web has a lot to answer for.
For one it has enabled special interest groups to get their message out on a global reach, which is fantastic and makes the web the great equalizer it’s supposed to be.
To mention just a few like Human Rights organisations, environmental groups, Tibet focused sites, and also sites as this with whatever focus and quality, etc.
This is the great upside of the web.
And there is the sad negative aspect of ‘free content’ which all of us access for convenience and to supplement our understanding of the world – the free information superhighway indeed.
Local news and independent viewpoints can never be replaced by large corporations with massive backing of big business, just imagine a world where there is only Fox news left – yak.
And that’s where the “average” Joe Blogs gets his daily dose of info from. The free world would be a mirror image of China, with Xinhua the only news supplier permitted there, and it is obvious what it did to that populace.
A world citizenry as mindless puppets at the mercy of mind-controllers…….
The biggest loss that occurs with the destruction of local newspapers is the disappearance of local news coverage. There are oodles of outfits that cover world events-though few that do so thoroughly and with panache- but there is no surfeit of news organizations in local communities to fill the void left by the closing of major local dailies.
If the Rocky Mnt. News and the Denver Post had not tripled their want-ad rates when they merged a few years ago, charging $35 – $50 to advertize household items for sale, then maybe craigslist would not have become such a popular venue here in the Rocky Mountains.
Aloha All
Columbia School of Journalism studies mass media corporate monopolies:
AP, Buffett, DIS, GE, Murdoch, Sumner, Time Warner, Reuters owned by Rothschild/Thomson et al nominee banks. Do they have a narrow point of view not necessarily reflecting their readers? Do they give free passes to their government enablers? At the end of the day, whom do they serve?
On February 19, U.S. Court of Appeals for District of Columbia struck down FCC rule that prevented any one company from owning a TV station and a cable system in the same market. The court also ordered the FCC to justify why it bans TV companies from owning stations that reach more than 35 percent of U.S. households…
So guess we may get more AP/CNBC/Reuters headlines and articles like these:
Buffett, Obama recommends U.S. stocks despite awful Q
Geithner Defends Tax Hikes In Obama Budget
Geithner: Obama to fight international tax dodgers
Personal favourites:
“I’m confident this is the right path for the country,” Geithner said.
“I really think there is almost universal agreement that in 2011 our economy will be back on a path of very substantial growth rates. Everything we’re doing right now working with Congress is designed to improve that outcome.”
Is it any wonder when government comes on media, smart money fades the news?
Meanwhile, with all the sturm und drang Dow 3000 headlines, we have been buying quality growth values:
http://stockcharts.com/def/servlet/Favorites.CServlet?obj=ID3251493
Cheers*Rich
All too true, alas! The world gets uglier, less user-friendly, and one is simply left feeling impotent.
Hi Rick, as usual you make some fine, not-so obvious points. However most of these organizations and their minions deserve this fate. Seriously where has the fourth estate been? Aren’t they supposed to be an advocate for us? Aren’t they supposed to expose the corruption instead of acting like zombified sycophantic cheerleaders that sold the country’s soul for the next leak or preferential treatment from the powers-that-be? I expect Wall St. and D.C. to be corrupt but in theory I’m supposed to expect the media to be my watchdog. In my mind the media’s complete failure is the gravest of all of the failures. They are to blame for this mess more than any other group of scoundrels. We expect the scoundrels to be scoundrels and expect the media to shine the light, not carry the water. Their conduct has been disgraceful. They’ve let politician after politican tell and repeat lies while at the same time shifting the public’s focus to the inane instead of the important. Unfortunately only a few of us have really seen this for what it was and fully appreciated the negative impact that it would have on our society/economy. No Rick, I won’t miss the propaganda at all. I’d rather guess at what I think is going on in the world than rely on this cowardly group of human beings.
I agree with the poster above about the slant.
As a “notion”, it is not good to see newspapers decline. But they have NOT been living up to this notion of the 4th estate being another check on government power for a long time.
Here is a concrete example:
The NYT and other majores loudly complained about Bush’s approach to the imperial presidency (John Yoo-ism and all that).
But now, Obama and Holder are figthing against, and saying they will refuse to comply with, a court order for access to classified information, sayint that it is the Presidents SOLE right to decide whether to release this info or not, and that NO court (not even the SCOTUS) has the right to compel this.
There is not cry of outrage at this action of the Obama administration in the major news outfits, when over the last 8 years, they screamed loudly.
Blatant partisanship.
If they disappears, we will be no worse off, than we are now. BUT,w e will loose the indoctrination of the papers, and that could be a good thing.
The evil of the MSM is not that they slant, but that the slant influences people selectively, the direction being determined by the newspapers. This has been true at least as far back as WR Hearst and his belligerence towards Spain. And true today where these organizations help special interests agitate for war with Iran.
Losing all that will be GOOD for society, not bad.
Even so, the loss of the Tech section is a shame, as is the Arts, etc.
On balance, though, I am not saddened if they all go under.
Could newspapers be going the way of another failed entity namely the music industry?
Heres an exercise, tune in your local pop radio channel. What do you hear? Pop music by chance? Nope, pop music is gone. Replacing it are endless repetitive loops of classic rock and pop rock from the early 2000s, 80s and 90s. There is a DEARTH of popular music out there, which only heightens my dread concerning the current zeitgeist. In addition to not having music, now news services are succumbing, movies can’t be far behind (reality shows are the first leg down of a dying industry).
This generation in addition to dealing with an economic disaster will not even have a culture to cushion the blow.
PS what could it mean CULTURALLY if the ECONOMIC model for news is deteriorating? IE. why don’t we want to know about things anymore?
Aloha All again
On the other hand, without newspapers and their public opinion push/pull polls, we would not have such contradictory gems as this:
Most voters also support Obama’s mortgage rescue plan unveiled last month in a bid to quell a rising tide of home foreclosures, but they think it is unfair to people who played by the rules and met all their payments.
The large snapshot of more than 2,500 voters reveals deep pessimism among U.S. voters about the state of the economy and prospects for a recovery, according to the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute.
Half of the survey sample was asked whether they believed that the federal government could fix the economic crisis within two years and answered no by a margin of 68 to 26 percent.
The other slice of the survey group was asked whether Obama alone would be able to lead the country out of the economic mire within the same time period, and answered no by a 64 to 28 percent margin.
Yet Obama’s approval rating, so far at least, seems immune to the impact of the worst economic crisis in decades: 59 percent of those polled said they approved of the job their new president is doing, compared with 25 percent who did not.
Overall, voters approve of Obama’s handling of the economy 57 to 33 percent, and significantly give him much higher marks on the issue – 56 to 26 percent – than Republicans.
“President Barack Obama’s approval rating is solid, compared to the historical record of new presidents,” said Peter Brown, assistant director of the institute.
“But the lofty numbers he enjoyed after his election are leveling off, largely because of declining support among Republicans,” Brown said.
There is also more good news than bad for Obama on three of his key domestic policy priorities, which he has been highlighting in the last two weeks.
By a 55 to 39 percent margin voters believe that he will get healthcare reform, an issue that has bedeviled past Democratic presidents, through the Congress this year.
By a 61 to 35 percent breakdown they also say they believe Obama when he promises not to raise taxes on anyone with a family income under 250,000 dollars a year.
But the president’s vow, made last week to cut the ballooning budget deficit in half by the end of his term in 2013, draws more cynicism.
Fifty-five percent of Americans do not believe he can do it, compared to 38 percent who do.
The survey was conducted between February 25 and March 2 among 2,573 voters with a margin of error of plus or minus 1.9 percentage points….
So, his policies won’t work, but we still love him?
BTW, as posted here before, O less popular than W after one month in office.
Meanwhile, nice to see some green for a change;
Aloha*Rich
Mr. Ackerman,
Reading your article made me think: “Tell me it’s not so, believe that the market will provide!”
If you also give up on the market there won’t be many of us left.
Please don’t worry about world-wide newsgathering within a primarily web-based media. The ubiquity and low cost of digital still and video cameras; along with the popularity of on-line file sharing means that on-scene news is effectively commoditized. Anyone can be “deputized” by a modern news agency to provide specific local media, while the analysis can be left up to those experienced in the field — giving them higher level (and hopefully more profitable) work.
I’m surprised that you seem to think that the media companies currently failing do not deserve to. I’m sorry your acquaitances within the industry are suffering but that’s because their employers ignored the web or simply viewed it as a different publishing platform for their print-based news. You yourself are a shining example of the advantage of web news media. How many of your subscribers would’ve ever heard of you was it not for the web?
Nowpublic media which states it will be profitable by year end stands in stark contrast to the media companies who are failing. The NYT is going down quite deservedly as their stock buy-back program was clearly going to be a ruinous liability on their balance sheet. Again I’m surprised that you’re not venting your anger more directly at the boneheads ruining these once great institutions.
Thanks for the daily emails. I truly enjoy them. Try not to let the Trolls in your comment section get to you so easily, they’re not worth your time!
%%%%%
A part of me would love to see the New York Times burn to the ground, but in the end I wind up saying that even a bad newspaper — a godawful one like the NY Times, say, or my local rag, the Boulder Camera — is better than no newspaper at all. That newspapers are dying is no more their fault than it was Kodak’s fault for succumbing to digital photography. In both cases, the change that hit them was far too big to survive. Now, no newspaper has sufficient revenues to support the costs of gathering and reporting news.
Whatever happens, we’ll still get national and global news, although it will be reduced in scope and depth. But it is the disappearance of local coverage that will hurt the most. And it will disappear. I spent seven years as a reporter and editor at a 100,000-circulation paper myself, and as badly as we covered the news, it still helped people make important decisions about all of the things that are shaped by the political process. Without local newspapers to hector, scandal-monger and expose the cockroaches to the light, who will hold the polititicans (and the judges) accountable? RA
Finally, thanks to Warren Buffett Berkshire Hathaway’s Washington Post for putting US all at ease re the new Secretary of States’ objectivity, even if they did hide them on the 157th page; (Those pesky unConsitutional Foreign emoluments againthat mass media monopoly never seem to question). Clinton Foundation Donations with the usual suspects (Pay no attention to the people behind the curtain and their “charitable” giving…):
Name Amount Added
AIDS-Life $500,001 to $1,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Walton Family Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
T.G. Holdings $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Zayed Family $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Wal-Mart Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Sultanate of Oman $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Sidney E. Frank Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Roy and Christine Sturgis Charitable & Educational Trust $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Rockefeller Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Howard Gilman Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Government of Brunei Darussalam $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Alix Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Taiwan Economic and Cultural Office $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Swiss Reinsurance Company $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Suzlon Energy Ltd. $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Streisand Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Sterling Stamos Capital Management, LP $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
State of Qatar $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
State of Kuwait $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Harold Snyder $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Michael Smurfit $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Amar Singh $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Bren and Melvin Simon $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Arnold H. Simon $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Walter H. Shorenstein $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Bernard L. Schwartz $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Robertson Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Paul Reynolds $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Princess Diana Memorial Fund $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Presidential Inaugural Committee $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Victor Pinchuk $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Open Society Institute $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Lakshmi N. Mittal $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
John D. Mackay $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
MAC AIDS Fund $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Lukas Lundin $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Michael and Jena King $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Howard and Michele Kessler $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Robert L. Johnson $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The James R. Greenbaum, Jr. Family Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Mala Gaonkar Haarman $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Friends of Saudi Arabia $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Wallace W. Fowler $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Mr. Issam M. Fares & The Wedge Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Entergy $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Elton John AIDS Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Dubai Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Robert Disbrow $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Victor P. Dahdaleh & The Victor Phillip Dahdaleh Charitable Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Clinton Giustra Sustainable Growth Initiative – Canada $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Citi Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Gilbert R. Chagoury $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Richard Caring $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Eli & Edythe Broad Foundation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Smith and Elizabeth Bagley $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Nasser Al-Rashid $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Alltel Corporation $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Sheikh Mohammed H. Al-Amoudi $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Absolute Return for Kids (ARK) $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
S. D. Abraham $1,000,001 to $5,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Wasserman Foundation $5,000,001 to $10,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Michael Schumacher $5,000,001 to $10,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Haim Saban and The Saban Family Foundation $5,000,001 to $10,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Nationale Postcode Loterij $5,000,001 to $10,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Government of Norway $5,000,001 to $10,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Theodore W. Waitt $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The ELMA Foundation $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Kingdom of Saudi Arabia $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Hunter Foundation $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Tom Golisano $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Frank Giustra, Chief Executive Officer, The Radcliffe Foundation $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Fred Eychaner $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
COPRESIDA-Secretariado Tecnico $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Stephen L. Bing $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Bill & Melinda Gates Foundation $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
AUSAID $10,000,001 to $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
UNITAID Greater than $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
The Children’s Investment Fund Foundation Greater than $25,000,000 Dec. 18, 1 PM
Great commentary is attracting thought provoking comments.
It is a truism that less is not more. I gave up on the NY times not because of information overload but because of two major factors. First, time constraints. Living in a triple tax environment (city,state,fed) with the additional sales tax, phone tax, bridge and tunnel toll tax, road tax, real estate tax, telephone tax, cigarette tax, booze tax, gasoline tax, cable tax, water tax, utilities tax etc etc that are a part of the landscape necessitated three full time jobs for the family in order to manage to only slowly fall into debt. Who can spare the time? Secondly, for years the NYTimes preferred to selectively report the news, selectively pick the “facts”, and the subjects. The reporting and conclusions generally resembled fables, allegories and fairy tailes nicely tailored to the progressive editorial slant that happened to be the exotic flavor of the day. Now, a certain amount of this is good for critical reasoning, attempting to separate fact from fiction, the rational from the irrational, reality from some utopian intention—–its like trying to solve a cryptogram. Over time, however, constantly depicting the landscape in terms and conditions that do not necessarily accurately depict what readers are seeing with their own two eyeballs is not a method to attract a customer base that might prefer facts.
As these institutions fade and fail, large parts of the news infrastructure will go with them. The news/information business has always attracted thinkers and resourceful people willing and able to go anywhere to get the story, often at personal risk, and it is not pleasant to see them fall victim. As these folks, collateral damage, join the many others in pursuit of re-employment in a related field or retraining for a different occupation, maybe some of them will have an epiphany. Perhaps they will begin to recognise that they were, wittingly or not, parts of media organs that for years were cheerleaders, provocateurs, and willing agents for the twisting, adulteration, and non enforcement of the laws of finance, ethics, economics, reverse racism, laws of responsibility, laws of God and man, and common sense which cumulatively are the axes which have landed us all in the present malaise. Inasmuch as these institutions were in the vanguard on the assault of our American values, I will not be shedding many tears as they make themselves obsolete.
Besides, is critical reasoning, the ability to think and discriminate among chocies all that it is rated to be. The continuing claim is that the government can provide the thinking and everything else for us. All that is required is to stand in line and fill out the paperwork. If you have trouble with the process, the state will provide translators and guides to help you fill out the forms correctly and in the language of your choice. Thought is not required.
&&&&&&&
Thanks for the many interesting observations you’ve shared with us on the site, TKO. I’m not sure why newspapers have done such a miserable job giving us the straight story. Perhaps there are deeper truths in each event than cannot be easily framed by the five W’s. I flunked this test myself early on in my reporting career. I was covering a koffee klatch held in the heart of Atlantic City’s black ward. Its purpose was to allow an elderly black woman with quite a few friends to advertise the fact that she supported ‘Hap’ Farley, a GOP machine politician who had been running South Jersey for 40 years. Hap showed up with an entourage of limousines, said a few perfunctory words to the 30 or so people gathered in the woman’s living room, then made ready to leave. As he retreated through the front door, he failed to undertsand that his hostess, from across the room, was trying to wave him back in so that he could blow out the candles on the birthday cake she’d baked for him. He left not knowing about the cake, or realizing how badly he had slighted the woman.
Although it occurred to me at the time that his inadvertent rudeness brought into sharp relief the superficiality of his ties to the black community. I ignored this subtle drama, reporting only the perfunctory speech Hap had given. Subsequently, the Mr. Clean slate of Democrats favored by the newspaper kicked the GOP slate out of town. They went on to be as incompetent and/or corrupt as the political machine they’d replaced. The casino legislation that they wrote and enacted helped make Atlantic City the unregenerate dump it is today.
At least Hap and the Boys got things done. They may have been ruthless and corrupt, and they probably stole huge sums from taxpayers, but at least they delivered good value. The machine got the Atlantic City Marina built, for one, and the Atlantic City Expressway — both at a time when they were hardly needed. RA
Insightful story. You live and you learn. Thanks for the forum.
Regards TKO
A re-read of my comments revealed perhaps a cynical tone that, while justifiable to a degree in the present environment, was not my intention. Permit me the following final casual “observation” to close this out with a positive spin. The news business is extremely demanding/streams of information piling into the newsroom from a myriad of sources and covering the entire range of topics. All of this has to be absorbed, validated, understood, reformulated, and released on the street in a readable format. Speed is essential and deadlines have to be met with no ifs, ands, or buts. When the product is released, the whole zany process restarts for the next deadline, and so on, forever. If non-producers survive more than a month in this business, it is only by special permission. The veteran characters and personalities spawned by this profession have the capacity. I am certain that, whether it be in a similar newspaper, designer pub, specialty magazine, electronic media, government, or any business, that XXXTHEY WILL LANDXXXTHEY WILL LAND ON THEIR FEETXXXTHEY WILL LAND ON THEIR FEET RUNNINGXXXAND THEY WILL MEET THE DEADLINESXXX////END////
Comments on this entry are closed.