Posted on 05/12/2009 6:44:38 AM PDT by abb
What would life without newspapers be like?
I avoid making predictions, because very few of my predictions have ever come true. I prefer, instead, to peer down the other end of the telescope, into the past, to inform my sense of what's to come. So when I consider the dead and dying newspapers of our time, and the post-newspaper world everybody is predicting, I can't help but think of the 114-day New York newspaper strike of 1962-63.
The strike (over wages and work rules), and the ensuing publishers' lockout, eliminated the circulation of 5.7 million daily and 7.2 million Sunday newspaper copies. That's a staggering number, considering that the greater New York circulation of the three major dailies still publishingthe New York Times, the Daily News, and the New York Poststands at about 1.6 million.
No conversation about newspapers' dismal present is complete without some anguished mention of how democracy will go off the rails unless the press is there to set it straight. (See last week's Senate hearings, chaired by Sen. John Kerry, D-Mass., for an example.) But even though the 1962-63 strike upended New York, neither the dozen newspaper accounts I've read about the strike nor the histories or memoirs from the era that I've pulled down from my shelf make it sound as though democracy and governance disappeared when the New York dailies' lights went out.
Instead, journalists and publishers improvised, and readers, parched for news, features, entertainment, and advertising, experimented with finding new sources. Giving up the daily newspaper habit proved easy for many New Yorkers, Gay Talese writes in his book The Kingdom and the Power: They "watched more television, or read more news magazines more thoroughly, or books, or discovered that New York seemed a more normal and placid place...
snip
(Excerpt) Read more at slate.com ...
*curtsey*
No no no, my FRiend, FReepers ain't Haters, we are Lovers. We can be more clever with our taunts, I believe...Dave
I disagree Disco Dave. I think Jhoffa summed it up perfectly.
These libs who own newspapers took their lesson from TASS and the KGB back while they were high at Woodstock and thought they could control society if they controlled the media.
Much like George Orwell when he wrote 1984 in 1948 didn't see that the same technology that could be used to oppress people could also be used to give them liberty and spread the truth. Statists didn't count on talk radio or the internet.
They wanted to play games. See if they like "Wheel of Fortune". Perhaps the Gannett, Sulzberger would like to buy a vowel....
S_ck M_ B_lls.
Phrase
There's so much to legitimately critique here.. there's really no reason to stoop to name calling.
I guess it just struck me funny is all.
I’ll have to start putting a *sarc* thing in there I suppose..
Hmmmmm now to see how this prints out.
>Prints out fine.
>Printing at "Full Screen" size it loses resolution.
>At "Half Screen" though it's perfect, crisp.
And Dave, we need not put *any* printing whatsoever on this. Let the pinheads figure it out for themselves. Smart boyz that they are, allow them to use their pin sized heads outside the realm of destroying our Republic. ;^)
I'll be getting mine in the mail, *today*. Minimally one every week goes to the three Dodo *candidates* in my sights. :^)
Yesssssssss! :o)
1) Steve Smith - Chairman
2) Martin Kaiser - Sr. VP Pres/Editor
3) George Stanly - VP Managing Editor
4) O. Ricardo Pimentel - VP Editorial Page
All 4 addressed to:
The Milwaukee Journal-Sentinel
PO Box 371
Milwaukee, WI 53201
* Phil Paige - Group Publisher -
5) Bill Yorth - Editor
PO Box 7
Waukesha, WI 53186
* Steve Cinccantell - Publisher
6) Jill Badzinski - Managing Editor
100 South 6th Avenue
West Bend, WI 53095
Those be mine, the publishers of the two smaller Conely rags will go next week.
All tubes loaded & ready to fire following answer(s) to the two below questions. ;^)
Question #1: Return addresses.
I spoke privately with Mr. Milhous on the matter of return addresses.
Those not familiar with the newspaper business should know all newspapers have something called a reverse directory.
Does just what its name implies, an address provides a name & telephone number.
Do we put return addresses on the *reminders*; or, is [that] best left optional for the participant??
I proposed we do put a return addy on.
Here's why:
The *reminders*, they're harmless.
While they may throw 'em away, at first?
When enough are received, over time, while appearing in widely varying cities across the Republic? They'll really want to noodle out the *phenomenon*.
The brainstems will eventually be compelled to learn what it's all about. Assign one of their crack (pipe) *reporters* to do a followup.
First thing they'd do is use a reverse directory, providing they've a return address.
So there'd most certainly be contact attempted somewhere, sometime, to someone by somebody from a given rag.
My position's since there are and would be no threats --implied or otherwise-- these *reminders* more akin to a tender loving *prediction* of their futures?
Calls inquiring would be harmless to all but *them*, as intended.
That said I'd recommend if a return address IS used, and a call DOES come?
No answer(s) --whatsoever-- would be volunteered.
None.
Nothing anyone could say to the kind of liars, malcontents and overall twisted minds we're dealing with here would be heard or accepted; nevermind, understood.
Don't do it.
An inquiring caller should be warmly greeted, told they're the focus of concern -- given what's happening to their newspaper. Which everyone knows is manifesting in tanking circ numbers implying a mighty dark foreboding outcome, for *them*.
Nothing but love *&* concern, that's all.
Again, anything further offered would be lost on fools and as usual & in their typical *style* distorted and/or misreported, anyway.
That's my .02.
Others?
Question #2: Is this subject ready for a stand alone thread? I get the distinct *feeling* posting to this thread isn't necessarily appreciated, the silence deafening. :o)
In an effort at avoiding a[ny] misunderstanding?
Perhaps it's time to consider this question: Is the idea ready to split off on its own?
A new thread w/could be a place for:
>An easy to understand mission statement explaining the who, what, where, when & whys of the effort.
>The image, ready for download.
>Serve as an excellent place to list all names & addresses of the buggers for *easy* reference, also.
>Plus let us not forget a place for kibitzing, galore.
Incidentally, I'm pinging JR if only so he may see for himself what we'd like to do using his place.
Seems the fair, if not safe thing to do. :o)
One last thing.
I KNOW the Liberal-Socialist lefts despise the rags as much as we on the right-wing, do.
Crazy, yes I know.
But, it's a fact.
Any forum member who enjoys playing *mole* at one of the leftist on-line WWW sewers whose not been outed as of yet? Why they might patiently await the subject of "media bias" to arise. It's inevitable.
When it does simply turn 'em on to our *little* idea.
NON PARTISN!!
Yes my friends, politics do indeed make for strange bedfellows.
And the MSM buggers?
Why they're squarely in the middle and *will* pop like big ripe ol' zit. :o)
Thought(s)??
Good thread.
Thx.
Thanks.
Pinged you just to get your take on *the* idea, my friend. Understand you've *other* irons in the fire, but... Plus I'd thought I could mooch a diagnosis outa you while I was at it; ergo, am I nuts? {g}
I think it’s a wonderful idea.
Publicity highlighting truth in all this mess is all to the good.
I wouldn’t expect a lot of great change, however.
my 2 cents.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.