Townhall.com, Where Your Opinion Counts
Talk Radio:   Bill Bennett   Mike Gallagher   Dennis Prager   Michael Medved   Hugh Hewitt   
BREAKING NEWS  LeftArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican   RightArrow - Townhall.com : Conservative, Political, Republican  
Columns, funnies & more in your inbox!
  • Check the boxes and send us your email address to receveive your free newsletter
  • Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
  • Townhall.com’s weekly inside scoop on what’s happening behind the scenes in the world of politics. When news breaks, we report.
  • Signup to receive the latest daily Townhall cartoons
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown :: Townhall.com Columnist
The Real Reason Newspapers Are On Life Support
by Floyd and Mary Beth Brown
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
[+] Text [-]
 
Poll
Will the Dems' health care Christmas Present to America be an improvement or detriment to our health care system?


The newspaper business is in trouble and for good reason. On March 19, according to the Philadelphia Bulletin, "A lawyer involved with legal action against Association of Community Organizations for Reform Now (ACORN) told a House Judiciary subcommittee. The New York Times had killed a story in October that would have shown a close link between ACORN, Project Vote and the Obama campaign because it would have been a 'a game changer.'"

Recently Barack Obama, a guest on the Jay Leno show, stuck his foot in his mouth by telling an insensitive joke featuring the Special Olympics, forcing him to apologize. The Internet instantly was abuzz about Obama's failed joke. The White House quickly issued a statement saying he was merely joking and didn't mean to disparage the developmentally challenged. The incident was widely covered and drove the online news cycle for nearly 24 hours. Oddly, the newspaper that claims to cover "all the news that is fit to print," missed it. The New York Times' Helene Cooper, while covering Obama's appearance on the show, failed to mention his blooper.

For Cooper not to mention it, even in passing, shows she was engaged in a type of politically motivated censorship. A more serious dereliction of duty is The New York Times' decision to forgo printing the ACORN story prior to the fall election. Editors who made this decision were violating the long- influential paper's mission statement in order to influence a political campaign.

Recently the Seattle Post-Intelligencer, a paper we can describe as left of The New York Times from years of reading it, ceased printing and went Web-only. The reason they said they stopped delivering the daily news on doorsteps was a shortage of advertisers and readers. The P-I management would have us believe both disappeared because of Internet competition, claiming to be victims of technology.

We think the newspaper's killer is more profound and not only the result of technology changes. A politically correct and liberal-biased newspaper industry that engages in censorship is the real reason for the industry's woes and decline. Many so-called "mainstream" newspapers are biased in favor of political liberalism, thus driving those who want a more complete reporting of the news to the Internet.

Citizen journalism, blogging and news sites both left and right are flourishing online. In fact, the online news audience is soaring, according to a report in Editor & Publisher. This growth online is depressing to longtime print journalists. Indeed, according a March 2008 article in The New Yorker, Bill Keller, executive editor of the Times, in a speech said, "At places where editors and publishers gather, the mood is funeral. Editors ask one another 'How are you?' in that sober tone one employs with friends who have just gone through rehab or a messy divorce."

The real crisis is in trust. Americans don't trust the newspapers because the premise that they are unbiased has been so totally discredited by recent scandals and blatant censorship. A study from Sacred Heart University found that fewer than 20 percent of Americans said they could believe "all or most" media reporting, a figure that has fallen from more than 27 percent just five years ago.

In the article titled "The Incredible Shrinking Newspaper," published online by Slate, Jack Shafer argues that the seeds of the great newspaper decline were planted more than 80 years ago. At that time, "radio challenged the newspapers' status as the only mass news, entertainment, and advertising medium." He surmises that the emergence of each new media technology -- the car radio, television, the portable radio, FM, cable, the VCR, the Internet, the cell phone, satellite radio and TV, the podcast, et.al- "has delivered another kick to newspapers."

But we believe that part of the success of these alternative mediums of communication is that they have not been dominated by the political left. AM radio has had a renaissance since the late 1980s precisely because it allowed for more diversity of voices, and conservatives were able to build an audience. Cable news is dominated by Fox News because they allow right-of-center voices on the air together with the usual liberal voices to create a more vigorous discussion.

If newspapers really want to regain relevance, they will print news that is not so easily dismissed as liberal. Likewise, they should cover a wider variety of stories that interest all audiences including conservatives. Shareholders of large public media companies should demand it. Here lies the path to relevance and healthy financial renewal.

Share:
Vote on It:
Average Vote:
 
About The Author
Floyd and Mary Beth Brown are both bestselling authors and speakers. In 1988, working from their kitchen table, they formed Citizens United.
 
TOWNHALL DAILY: Be the first to read Floyd and Mary Beth Brown's column. Sign up today and receive Townhall.com daily lineup delivered each morning to your inbox.
On the nail, five stars!
.

Wrong
I used to subscribe to a few different newspapers, local and national. All had different points of view and individual perspectives.

I have cancelled all. Not for any political reason but because I can read more news, with faster updates 24/7/365 by clicking on Google news.

I don't have to pay for it, and I don't have to bundle them up at the end of every month.

It has NOTHING to do with right or left leaning editorial boards.

Too late now
Once the public trust was broken and people found they could more conveniently get the news over the internet the dirge began.

Now it's too late. Since people have found another source they like better than print media, even if the print media started publishing a truly great product, it's unlikely they'd gain ground.

The saddest part is that the print media had so many boots on the ground to cover the news. That may be lost with their demise.

I hope they all go out business
And they taked CNN/CBS/ABC/NBC with them.

Try Poor Quality Reporting on for Size..
Biased or not, I quit reading newspapers because of the quality of the reporting. I am a former employee of the FDA and was in the military before that, and anytime I read an article that touched those fields, I noticed eror after error in just the basic "facts" reported. Seeing reporters repeatedly bungling topics I knew about did not fill me with confidence in stories about areas I knew little about. Bottom line I can't trust them to get anything right, and why should I pay for that - except for maybe the coupons!

Newspapers have supported every
harebrianed left-wing agenda for several decades, including such trash as the Whole Language and Whole Math movements in the 80s and early 90s, until parents finally put up enough fuss--starting in CA of all places--that the pseudo-reading/math programs were phased out.

In the meantime, millions of students simply were never taught to read or do simple arithematic. These are likely the people in their 20s and 30s today who are fast becoming unemployed, as they weren't very employable to begin with.

A direct result of not teaching reading has been a decline in all reading from hard-cover books (a best seller may be based on merely 100,000 copies--out of 3000,000,000 in pop.). Short stories are also dead. No place to publish them except in academic anthologies.

And newspapers have the double whammy of an audience that's not very literate and an agenda that many are not interested in being indoctrinated into.

Not that I care. The sooner the NYTimes and Wash. Toast collapse the better information flow will be, as STILL, despite its demonstrative foolish slant, almost all US news is based on whatever the NYT's runs first thing in the morning. You get it all over tv and then all print sources pick it up.

Good riddance. Send tea bags. Go to tea parties. Write DC. Back Reps. who are hacking away at the simulus krap designed to enslave you to taxes and inflation for generations. Get active. And don't buy a newspaper except the WSJ.

I expect to see
the nationwide tea party tax protects, planned for April 15th, to be ignored by most of the MSM.

If the Indianapolis Star, in Indiana, ignores the protest planned at the state house on April 15th, I am prepared to picket their downtown headquarters even if I have to go alone.

Be forwarned Indianapolis Star.

Yes, also tea party in Trenton, NJ, the
15th and one in Phila. the 18th.

Take to the streets where the Big O bused ACORN stooges for a *spontaneous& demonstration ag. AIG. Show the DC pigs that everyone will not just roll over and let *the One* walk over them.

Newspapers
"single variate analysis is the hallmark of a neophyte scholar." --My unnamed grad professor in IPE.

Newspapers are dying for many reasons. Advertisers can get more bang for the buck in radio and cable than newspapers--the cost is similar and they reach more "eyeballs (or eardrums as it were). Same with the Internet. This is not the 1950s. People commute longer distances and don't have time to sit down and read a morning paper or once they get home--activities with kids and other things make newspaper reading a time waster few have time for.

The Internet allows you to read for free most newspapers. I can read newspapers from all over the world, why should I buy a subscription?

People get their "news" from other sources. The Internet, Talk Radio, cable and other entertainment like the DVD, Ipods and the like have pushed the newspapers to the fringe. Hardcopy newspaper subscribers tend to be older and are dying off. At least in the US--other countries this is not the case.

It is simplistic to blame this on only the editorial policies of the newspapers--it goes much deeper than this. Newspapers in very liberal cities are having just as much trouble as newspapers out of step with their surrounding communities.


Ms. Kelly
"the nationwide tea party tax protects, planned for April 15th, to be ignored by most of the MSM."


Some others are as well--e.g. right of center libertarian, Neal Boortz for example.

This "tea party" is like going out a peeing in the street. It might make you feel better but it won't do much good.


Right on!
.

Steve
I also hope they all go out of business and they should not get bailouts. When we don't like or need something, we do not buy it, whether it be cars or newspapers; no amount of government bailouts are going to save companies whose products are unwanted.

Five Stars column

It's definately a combination
the Internet, bias, poor reporting. But one I think that is not discussed enough (mentioned here briefly) is that they cover so many stories that people are not interested in reading. Forget the bias in how they frame an issue or tell the story -- they are bisaed to printing stories to further their agenda like global warming, gay marriage, perceived discrimination, etc. Many normal people go through their lives without really thinking about gay marriage or global warming or the like. These things are not of primary importance to most people so they have no interest in reading about them ad nauseum. And there are many other such topics.

David Rockefeller thanks
We are grateful to The Washington Post, The New York Times, Time Magazine and other great publications whose directors have attended our meetings and respected their promises of discretion for almost forty years. It would have been impossible for us to develop our plan for the world if we had been subject to the bright lights of publicity during those years. But, the work is now much more sophisticated and prepared to march towards a world government. The supranational sovereignty of an intellectual elite and world bankers is surely preferable to the national auto-determination practiced in past centuries. — David Rockefeller, founder of the Trilateral Commission, address to The Trilateral Commission, June, 1991.

The President of the United States

is paying millions of dollars to prevent the citizens of America from examining his birth certificate and college records. No one knows why the President is spending the money and only one news organization is even interestedin why the President is spending all of this money. Only one news organization wonders what is so damaging in the President's past that he would spend millions of dollars to keep it concealed.

That, in a nutshell, is the state of journalism today. There are very few professional journalists left and only one professional publisher.

The Subversion Of The Free Press

Operation MOCKINGBIRD

"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." - CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. "Katherine The Great," by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991)

Look it up, fascinating reading, even if it was fiction, and is not.

It's advertising, more than bias
Real and perceived liberal bias is probably one factor in the decline of newspapers, but the bigger issue is that print's business model is behind the times.

I'm a reporter at a small California newspaper that was once a a medium-sized California newspaper. The editorial position moderate, sometimes slanting to the left. The paper endorsed Bush in 2004 and Obama in 2008.

Newspapers are having trouble because our advertisers are disappearing (Robinsons-May, Circuit City, several car dealerships) and readers can get news online for free.

Many newspapers have enhanced their online offerings while print editions shrunk. It doesn't make very much sense to pay for a product when a superior product is conveniently available for free and without charge.

If newspapers were indeed losing money because vast swaths of the public want a conservative alternative, I would expect to see an upsurge in right-leaning print products similar to what Rush Limbaugh accomplished on talk radio and what Fox News did on cable.

I have to admit ignorance as to whether the Washington Times and Pittsburgh Tribune-Review are faring better than other print outlets, but do not see conservative alternatives setting up shop in places like Los Angeles or Seattle. The San Diego Union Tribune and Orange County Register are respectively right-of-center and libertarian and are not immune from the financial difficulties faced by the Los Angeles Times.

If I may offer a defense for newspapers on this Web site, I would like to ask every reader here to think about whether they want their local newspaper to survive. Most journalists work at small- or medium-circulation newspapers for low pay because they are crazy enough to think that reporting the news can make a difference. We're not perfect, but do you really want to live in a community where city council members and county supervisors can spend your tax dollars without anybody around to question their actions?

We quit
our local paper several months ago. One thing I haven't seen mentioned is the modern news
paper business is, while not a monopoly in the classic sense because there are so many big
publishers that have bought the small town and rival city papers. However, it is a monopoly because they perpetuated the demise of the competition..there is none or very little that could make a dent in their propaganda machine.
And the fact that most lazy writers (not reporters anymore) use the ap propaganda pap
to write stories. Even locally, the writers of local columns don't do their own leg work, they rely on what someone tells them or they make phone calls and take one side of a story when they can't reach the other side (and don't try very hard to do that), these days that's not hard to do. Not when a classmate 1500 miles away can locate almost all former classmates for a 50 year reunion via the internet.
I used to get my local paper, along with the Manchester Union Leader when Nackey was alive (I quit then because my husband was bugging me about all the extra papers he had to recycle), and the Washington Times Weekly which I have just resubscribed to.
Given they have subverted their constitutional mandate to be the nations watch dogs, they deserve to die and to die quickly, their conspiracy to destroy this REpublic is beneath contempt.

Ignorance and delusion

I agree with Borg, except radio and TV share in never getting any subject right. The reporters have degrees in Journalism, and absolutely zero real world experience related to whatever subject they write about. "Losers and dropouts who want to Make A Difference", as Williamson says. ("Better to Beg Forgiveness")

Another problem is the type of support the newspapers and radio and TV stations get from the Liberals.

All mouth and no wallet.

As a result, the people in charge just cannot believe they are failing and they cannot understand why, so they cannot adapt.

Miss the newsprint though
After 30 years as a subscriber to the Washington Post (yeah, I know..., but really liked reading over breakfast), I canceled because of price vs value. Decided I could use $350/year for other things besides reading lefty bias. Besides, it's free on the net, so my wife still gets her crossword.

The hometown paper (which I dropped because it was mostly recycled AP copy) just announced the shutdown of their press resulting in the loss of 8 full time and 15 part time jobs. This is a Gannett paper. Printing will be done by the family owned paper in the next town which is happy to have the added revenue I'm sure!

The diversity of sources and opinion on line is the killer for them.

I do miss having newsprint around for starting fires, masking paint projects, etc.

Multifactorial
The columnists are partly right: newspapers are collapsing because they've been haughty, biased, and dishonest. I don't often catch myself agreeing with Akagi; but he, too, it partly right: there's more to the death of the traditional press than its betrayal of trust.

For example, cluelessness. Other media have been eroding newspapers' base for nearly a century. (The experimental Pittsburgh radio station 8XK was commercial even before it was licensed in 1920 as KDKA.) Even so, newspapers relied more and more on advertising revenue. They could have sold high-quality content to readers hungry for reliable news and coherent opinion. Instead, they sold readers' attention to advertisers.

Readers attracted by low subscription rates and childish junk are a fickle lot, however. So are advertisers in an obviously moribund medium. When circulation or ad revenue declined, most newspapers reduced content, further alienating readers. By the time I was in high school -- a while ago -- many newspapers were already 75-80 percent ads. At length newspapers became hard to distinguish from specialty publications that consist of nothing but ads, such as apartment finders, coupon books, car/truck/RV/boat trader magazines, and those inescapable shoppers. Two important differences remained, however: these new advertising vehicles were unpretentious, ubiquitous, and commonly free of charge.

All this came to pass before the earliest version of Mosaic made Web browsing possible. When the Internet finally turned into a serious competitor, newspapers were doomed. They couldn't reduce content further. They couldn't raise subscription rates for insulting crap. (Well, some tried.) The newspapers that have survived in print this long have two choices: go online and try to find a niche or go out of business. Many that try to make it in cyberspace will ultimately have the second option forced on them.

Good riddance.



like Walter/Va I like paper
I am as rockribbed conservative as anyone on this thread. But i will miss paper, even if the quasi-satanic bostonglobe goes under. Unlike internet news, you can have it at your breakfast table, and even at more personal places. I find it easier to go back and forth between pages in paper, and to underline and write marginal comments for potential letters to the editor (which rarely get printed, because from the conservative side. Besides, with the globe, i like to 'keep up with what the enemies are thinking.' And I have an 'email relationship' with a few of their reporters, basically good people, and i don't wish ill for them and their families.

But I really believe, with a few exceptions, that most of the reporters, if not editors, really understand that they are liberal/left of center. They really think that they are reporting objectively. It is like that journalist from 1972, Polly ?, who wrote in the Times, when Nixon won 49-1, the one being my hellhole of a state, plus DC, "How could he have won? I don't know anyone who voted for Nixon." They live in a closed world, talk to each other, etc. More often their choice of stories/omissions is worse than the actual reporting. E.g.: 50 anti-church protesters. Meanwhile, in greater Boston, 500,000 people go to church that Sunday. They only report the 'man bites dog' aspect. For them, regular, 'boring' daily life holds no interest.

PS
Here in Boston/New England, for a while, the Boston Herald was a good conservative alternative. But unfortunately, the publisher, Pat Purcell, was very stung by the Catholic priest scandal, which seems to have backed him off at least social conservatism. At least he publishes GWill and Cal Thomas and the great Charles Krauthammer. Conservative papers too often think, to prove their 'objectivity,' that they have to balance off once in a while with more liberal editorials.

With the Globe, and perhaps with the Times, Post, et al, one of their big financial problems is the still-mega salaries of the owner/editorial staff, while they lay off the peons. Could not the biggies take some salary cuts, share the pain, to try to ensure survival? No, they would rather bring down the house around them.


Walter, JMartin
Yeah, newsprint has its uses. And even though it's highly acidic, its lifespan is probably at least as great as that of a DVD.

In any event, print is a liberating medium. You can read a newspaper without apps, 3G, or Wi-Fi; without being Bluetooth-enabled; without being tied to a LAN, a WAN, or a power grid. You can set it down, fall asleep, pick it back up, or read it back to front if you please. You can roll it up, stick it in your pocket, clip it, photocopy it, or let the cat widdle on it. But if its content is false, shallow, or offensive, who needs it? Cat litter is less costly.

The Brown
Did you see the President and First Lady in London today? They were the "Bomb". America is back in the "Light". Go Team Obama!!! We love America and the World...

Killer/GA, serious or
facetious?

Not quite sure. If he's being serious, he's most unserious. Making good photo-ops is about the most superficial thing i can imagine. They are trying to recreate the Kennedy's, and he was close to the worst president we've ever had.

Bankrupt The Main Stream Media !

The Rocky Mountain News shutters its doors.The Seattle Post Intelligencer Print Edition bites the dust,The Philadelphia Inquirer goes into Chapter 11 Bankruptcy,Mexican slickster Carlos Slim has to bail out The New York Times.

Bankrupt The Main Stream Media Liberal Agendists.

Akaqi
Newspapers in very liberal cities are having just as much trouble as newspapers out of step with their surrounding communities.
..........................
Thats because the rank and file liberals went to public schools and either can't or don't read.


#1 Reason
Illitterassc

#2 Reasons
The left is boycotting print media because of green reasons.

take that, ark dem-gazette
i cancelled my subscription to that liberal rag due to its repeated editorial position making fun of anyone that is against illegal immigration. the liberal reg repeatedly printed "illegal immigrants!" in italics. clearly they were stating that anyone against illegal immigration was foolish. die, liberal rag.

The die is cast ....
the Lord Obama requires a Pravda. Next step, bailout the printed media. You do recognize that there is an NPR and National TV and the Endowment for the Arts.
The only people I feel sorry for in the coming Hell are the military guys who will deliberately be sent in harms way to further dis-spirit the nation with enforced failures as has been done with everything else.
It takes a democrat to do what republicans have the will for but not the grit.

The die is cast ...
the Lord Obama requires a Pravda. Next step, bailout the printed media. You do recognize that there is an NPR and National TV and the Endowment for the Arts.
The only people I feel sorry for in the coming Hell are the military guys who will deliberately be sent in harms way to further dis-spirit the nation with enforced failures as has been done with everything else.
It takes a democrat to do what republicans have the will for but not the grit.

The die is cast ...
the Lord Obama requires a Pravda. Next step, bailout the printed media. You do recognize that there is an NPR and National TV and the Endowment for the Arts.
The only people I feel sorry for in the coming Hell are the military guys who will deliberately be sent in harms way to further dis-spirit the nation with enforced failures as has been done with everything else.
It takes a democrat to do what republicans have the will for but not the grit.

curmudgeon
take that, ark dem-gazette
i cancelled my subscription to that liberal rag due to its repeated editorial position making fun of anyone that is against illegal immigration. the liberal reg repeatedly printed "illegal immigrants!" in italics. clearly they were stating that anyone against illegal immigration was foolish. die, liberal rag.
......................

I quit them when clinton was gov.

I Hope They All Fail
For years I read 7 newspapers a day, but eventually the lying and bias became so great I could not stomach any more. Now I read none. In the past I watched television news, also. Now I watch none. If any real journalists ever emerge that can report the news, I will consider reading and watching again, but never again will I sit and listen to some 'anchor' interpret for me what the news is. I feel the same about the print media. Had the media done its job, the nation would not be in the quandary it is in now because of this dictator-in-training and they can never be forgiven for their egregious lapse. I hope every newspaper in this country fails.

As The World Turns ,Papers Fail
They are just to liberal , and next is TV ,ABC,CBS,PBS,MSNBC,NBC. I always would get up in the morning and watch Good Morning America
until the News was just to one sided. But the good part is now I don't have a satalite bill any more. I receive all my news from the internet where I can research the real news & where and whom is doing what to each other as it happens .

The NYT's Third World Fetish
The NYT argues for open borders at every opportunity, maybe thinking that it will seem to be of higher quality if the majority of its readership is made up of non-English speakers.
- - -
Border Enforcement + Immigration Moratorium = Job, Crime & Eco Sanity

Tone deaf
There's a characteristic "tone" in liberal writing and oration that turns people off: telling them what they think and what they should think, with a loudly implied sneer at anyone who disagrees as both stupid and unethical. People will take only so much of this puerile condescension and then they look and listen elsewhere.

Not quite all...
Large newspapers such as the NY and LA Times are indeed in trouble, for the reasons you mention.

But, all across the country small local papers with skeleton staffs are doing just fine, thank you very much.

This is an important point, because it gives the lie to the excuse that it's "technology" that's killing the big papers.


Renny
I am betting on bad weather for the Northeast on your protest days. But you and others must realize,you have no win. What you are seeing today,was planted 60 years ago. Watching TV,drinking beer and watching porn has cost your "Freedom". Now you understand that Freedom ain't "Free"! The world is not falling apart,it's just being rearranged. S O RR Y!

Not Going Back
Mr. Pink writes: "If newspapers were indeed losing money because vast swaths of the public want a conservative alternative, I would expect to see an upsurge in right-leaning print products similar to what Rush Limbaugh accomplished on talk radio and what Fox News did on cable."

Not necessarily. I'll use myself as exhibit A. We did get a print edition when we lived in Northern Virginia - The Wash. Times. Then we moved to a different part of the state. Got the local paper for a few days to check it out and decided it was a liberal rag. Three months after moving, we got high-speed Internet, now our #1 source for news. Would I subscribe to a print newspaper if an alternative were available? Maybe. But probably not at this point. Liberal bias forced me into switching technologies. I'd have been perfectly content with print if the content weren't so blatantly skewed. But going back? Doubtful.

Even worse for newspapers, my kids are probably lost to them for good. They could have grown up with a newspaper on the breakfast table, reading the comics, sharing the best/most interesting lines from stories, sports scores, etc. But they won't. That tradition ended with my generation.

The Free Press
was the ONLY private entity specifically mentioned in the Constitution. It was their mandate to be a watch dog on the political class. Instead they've become the lap dogs for the liberal left, and even so-called "moderates" have become nauseated by their slavishness to ideologies.

One local rag here, The Tucson Citizen, was going to fold last month, then decided to publish day to day and hopefully find a buyer (sucker) to keep it afloat. Like the Daily (Red) Star. the other rag in town, the Citizen is completely filled with touchy feely, greenie baloney and lefty lunacy articles that are poorly researched and written. These so-called news stories would be better suited to the opinion pages, but aren't literate enough for the editors, I would guess.

People instinctively know when they are being snowed and refuse to be led by illiterates. The one group still holding on to newspapers is senior citizens but unfortunately, they are generally well educated and are insulted by the condescending preaching from the dumbed down "reporting."

I used to write to the editors frequently and blast them and their writers, and even though they would publish most of my screeds, I finally decided my efforts were futile, a waste of time and falling on deaf ears.

It is a time tested rule of capitalism; when you don't give the customer what he wants, he goes elsewhere.

Cancelled my newspaper
You have "hit the nail on the head" with this article. One of my very favorite things to do in the morning is drink my coffee and read my city newspaper cover to cover. It is something I have done since I was a teenager. However, after these past two years, the paper had just stopped being unbiased and only would quote articles from other ultra left sources. The end for me came when the paper dropped an unbiased, very interesting and entertaining columnist so the wife of a uber liberal senator could write her colunms again. I gave the paper another year because I just didn't want to give up my morning routine but the unashamed fawning over a certain presidential candidate was the last straw for me. I cancelled by subscription. Strangely, I don't even miss the paper because of what it had become.

No surprise there...
My local paper, The Augusta Chronicle-Herald, professes to be conservative; it is- insofar as promoting business is concerned. Problem is, the only pro-business articles are pro the owner of the publication. The rest of the material is pure, unadulterated propaganda from American Pravda (AP). The same selectivity is shown news stories as NYT; those that show the administration and Obambi in a bad light are buried in small columns between ads for massage parlors or simply do not run. Because of the reduced readership, the paper has fewer advertisers, and that means a thinner and thinner paper over the year- hardly seems worth the cover price after a time.

Stop the Presses. Really.
I can attest to the truth of the authors' thesis. I used to read the NYT for years, faithfully buying the Sunday issue. I gave it up several years ago and now subscribe to the Wall Street Journal and listen to conservative talk radio.

Sean Hannity had the true story about Wright and William Ayers months before the major media gave any coverage at all.

This last election was subject to a double whammy from "objective" journalists.

1. Say nothing bad about liberals.
2. Speak no evil of blacks, especially black politicians.

Political correctness has destroyed the news media and may well destroy the country.


And here's what will kill AP
... the moment they'll start allowing comments.

Wait for it. Their idiotic no-comment policy can't last forever in this Web 2.0 world, and when it's lifted, informed readers with more commonsense in their toenails than their own staff has combined will expose their BS as BS.

I miss the paper
My Sunday ritual (after church) is to read the Sunday paper through and do the crossword. I used to be a newspaper junkie. No more. The paper here is just rehashed AP with a few liberal editorials. Besides, by the time I read the Sunday paper I realize that I've read everything in it 3 days ago online. But I will miss the ritual....and the crossword.

Re: Bent perspectus
"You could get a journalist cheaper than a good call girl, for a couple hundred dollars a month." - CIA operative discussing with Philip Graham, editor Washington Post, on the availability and prices of journalists willing to peddle CIA propaganda and cover stories. "Katherine The Great," by Deborah Davis (New York: Sheridan Square Press, 1991)

"Brought to you by the same folks who have published national security programs designed to defend the United States from terrorist attacks, and were asked by the White House and Congress members of both parties to not publish, the NY Times provides the name of a CIA interrogator so that al Qaeda knows who to look for, along with his family, to torture and kill."

To "spike" a story means to cancel its publication. Arnaud de Borchgrave and Robert Moss envision a scenario in which the KGB exploits the attitudes of the unsuspecting Western media, which was more interested in unmasking CIA agents than stopping the Soviets, threatening to "spike" their hero's big scoop.

The best-selling book was marketed as an expose of real-life Washington. TIME called the book a roman a clef for its fictionalized versions of real people and organizations, including Zbigniew Brzezinski and the radical left-wing magazine Ramparts.

"The Spike" is a 1980 spy thriller novel by Arnaud de Borchgrave and Robert Moss (New York: Crown Publishers, 1980).

Look it up, fascinating reading, even if it was fiction, and is not.

Pink -
What if no one reports on the local city council? Like no one reported on a socialist stooge for george soros? The result: we get a community organizer doofus and a national socialist HORs, not to mention a senate that is soon to be joined by a failed comedian!
Give me the call girl - I'd have less long-term issues with HER! (At least my GRANDCHILDREN wouldn't still be paying for her...)
I have gone to the local birdcage liner office and demanded they stop delivering it. They STILL keep littering my driveway every day - even though I refuse to pay for it. How do I get them to STOP????

Killer -
Your doctor called - you haven't been taking your meds, and you know your parole depends on it. Now go away and stop bothering people.

Funeral or Funereal?
Is the mood a funeral itself or is the mood of the Editors funereal?

newspapers
The author is right on. I stopped listening to CNN in 1993 after finally becoming conscious of their biased reporting ... ditto with the L.A. Times and later the S.F. Chronicle. I'll read 'biased' reporting ... but at least tell me that you are biased ... don't pretend to be objective and honest, because then you are totally unreliable as a source of news and information.

Reasons No.2 & 1 that I quit taking the
paper, in that order.

I used to get up early and race out to the front yard to get the paper to read while I had my coffee before getting ready for work. Then I realized I was going to work angry every morning because of the leftist bias of the local reporters and editors. They didn't print many of my rebuttals to their "facts." I don't know how many other rebuttals were religated to the "circular file," but they always printed more letters in agreement with them than those in disagreement with them. I decided I didn't want to help pay their salaries.

A more important reason happened several years earlier. The news that China now controls both sides of the Panama Canal (reported during the Clinton administration) was religated to page 8. In my opinion, it should have been at the top of page 1. I wonder how many people know that even today.

life support
They won't tell the truth!

AynRandLives
It is my ritual now to do the same thing with my paper. I do the daily crossword,check the obits and some local news. Most of the world and national news I have already read on line.

I don't trust the AP,Reuters or most other news carriers and that is what my newspaper uses for a lot of news that isn't local..

The editorial page is conservative,with a mixture on the op-eds. When that changes,I will drop my subscription.

Irresponsible
The local rag in Memphis just received a few thousand MORE cancellations because the anti-gun editor decided to put up an online database with the names and addresses of every concealed-carry permit holder in Tennessee.

They were already in deep financial trouble, and were desperately promoting readership by giving away papers outside many local stores like Walgreens and Kroger. Usually I just tell them that I would rather pay for a better quality toilet paper, but occasionally,if a trash can is located close by, I will accept the proffered paper and immediately put it where it belongs. After all, I wouldn't want to litter!

Part, but not all, of the grim reality
It's fair to say that many newspapers have lost influence as their ideology has begun driving their content. But some UK papers are doing fine; and they tend to shill for their position even more loudly. Maybe it's the fake impartiality that hurts papers.

But there are plenty of economic realities that hurt as well. Newspapers, given a near-monopoly situation, got used to making decisions in a vacuum. As competitors have emerged, they've responded by raising rates, even while supplying less content and less eyeballs. Consumers and advertisers (who are often 1 and the same) leave as a result of worse value. Newspapers respond by raising rates more, cutting pages, and spending less on reporting. And so the cycle continues.

Newspapers are throwing away their main advantage, which is being the "town square" for their locality. Craigslist takes marketshare because they're a better value proposition than print classifieds. But that needn't be the case.

Newspapers
I live in Seattle and a while ago changed from the Seattle Times, with which I engaged in running email exchanges about its biases "reporting" in the "news". Its news articles typically report quotes from the left or left-leaning "activists" but rarely as much ink to the right. After I switched to the P-I if folded. Now I am back at the Times. I have no choice. Oh, well, I'll read it simply to get angry, then read The Wall Street Journal to get real news on what is happening.

http://www.periodictablet.com

P-I was left, no doubt
When the Supreme Court made its D.C. vs. Heller decision, the P-I buried it in the middle of the front section. Even, my local newspaper, the Bellingham Herald, put it on the front page.

The P-I, to its credit, did print my letter criticizing them and the four dissenters in that decision.

I do not miss David Horsey, their left-wing Pulitzer-Prize winning cartoonist. (Shows you which way the Pulitzer committee leans, doesn't it?)

The Village Voice
that house organ of liberal stupidity and fruit salad social views has to GIVE AWAY THE PAPER all over Manhattan because nobody will BUY it! It is 100% financed by ads and probably propped up by Soros.

-Ray
NRA Life Member
Soli Deo Gloria!!

I dropped subscriptions to 2 papers...
The S.F. Chronicle and the Contra Costa Times -- owned by conglomerate media companies -- have liberalized, homogenized, BS news. Once upon a time the Chronicle was a quirky and interesting paper (even if it was liberal leaning). The Contra Costa Times was once owned by a notorious conservative publisher.

Both papers once prided themselves for delivering (relatively) balanced news coverage with _editorials_ expressing the opinions of the paper's management.

Over the years, both papers drifted into newsless-liberal rants in the hard news pages. Opposing viewpoints weren't expressed, or, if they were, they might be a dismissive single paragraph, 17 paragraphs into a 20 paragraph article that skipped to a new page after 12 paragraphs -- ensuring that almost no one would see the alternate view.

I quit my subscriptions 2 years ago. I'd been a subscriber to the S.F. Chronicle for 40+ years. I thought I'd miss the papers. I don't.

Like any business that no longer serves its patrons, I have no problem with them going out of business. They richly deserve that fate.

High Five to Mr. Pink
He spoke the simple truth. The Times...well, they are a'changin.' For the left, look at the bright side: just think of all those happy trees you'll be saving.

Who gets their news in print anymore?
"He spoke the simple truth. The Times...well, they are a'changin.' For the left, look at the bright side: just think of all those happy trees you'll be saving."

Why pay for something that has better information when free? As long as you watch sourcing, the internet is all you need.

Newspapers
When you write for the ignorant, don't expect to sell many papers. The ignorant don't read.

How about some news?
Part of the problem is that newspapers just print the talking points that are spoon fed them by the political parties. There is little investigative reporting or anything that might require effort or a bit of perspiration. Look at the National Enquirer scooping the mainstream media on the Edwards affair. Also, a recent piece by a formerly British journalist mentioned that things happen here that would never happen in the U.K. - such as people being allowd to pick who interviews them.

Get a load of this
Senator Benjamin Cardin
Has introduced a Bill to make failing newpapers taxpayer supported.


"Cardin's Newspaper Revitalization Act would allow newspapers to operate as nonprofits for educational purposes under the U.S. tax code, giving them a similar status to public broadcasting companies."

Pravda had the very same leeway and support by the communists.

I bet Senator Benjamin Cardin would resent me calling him a communist

Re: For the Record
"But some UK papers are doing fine; and they tend to shill for their position even more loudly. Maybe it's the fake impartiality that hurts papers."

Brits enjoy the taxpayer supported BBC (Radio on TV) and have to pay tax for the priviledge of viewing their tube.

BTW, besides the "Tabloids", some of the strongest British newspapers carry a pretty conservative line. Anyway, the average Brit could care less as long they get their National Health and can "soak the rich" in order to enjoy the rest of the "fruits of a Socialist State".

Re: Economic Reality
The only reason we get a Newspaper at our casa is so my wife can clip the grocery coupons so we can survive in the "Obama Boom"!

One Questions Libs Avoid
If most of our urban areas are filled with Center-Left to Far Left Democrats, then how come so many newsapers are falling? I mean LA, Detroit, New York, Chitown, Seatle, St Louis, not to mention Dallas, Cinncinatti, and Boston all have major dailies that are either shutdown or are floundering. Yet, these cities are as blue as they come.

We constantly hear how smart, educated, nuanced, and sophisticated liberals are. We are also constantly lectured that only the inbred ditto head bitter clingers of the Republican Party listen to talk radio because they cannot read. If this is the case, then why don't more liberals subscribe to thier urban dailies? As usual, Liberals demand that everyone else support thier pet projets, but themselves.

Why papers die
After reading the NY Times since 1947, I finally gave up after a protracted series of email exchanges with Bill Keller and others produced nothing rational. Once it became clear that the Times had left the NEWS business to become a flat-out political tract there was no purposed served by buying it. My former employer the Philadelphia Inquirer has gone the way, I suggest largely for the same reasons.
Yes, there is lots of competition from the net, but I still get the Wall Street Journal and other print publications because they are still in the NEWS business. Similarly, my Economist subscription continues while Time and Newsweek were off my list decades ago for the same reason -- they are tracts, not news magazines, so who needs them?

WHY???
That's right, why should I pay for a newspaper that is trying very hard to deceive me. How else can you explain their support of Barack Obama. I will never forgive them for this deception and I hope every one of them go out of business. Barack would never let that happen...he is by nature running for re-election and he needs these Snakes to be re-elected. Bailout # Whatever is on the way, per that maniac Waxman....it is about Energy and Commerce right...and everybody being a clone of him. That sucks!!!

The Death Knell Of Newspapers.
I know of no newspaper that is not in danger of losing their readership. Mine included. There are many reasons,of course.

Most readers,I believe are seniors or at least,not the young. Most youngsters get their news from left-wing tv or the internet and have no use for newspapers.

Maybe many papers are too liberal in Red States and too conservative in Blue states. Who knows? The economy may be one reason for their demise. Maybe it is all three .


Quality of news
Newspapers used to have the advantage in quality of news. When I was in journalism school, you quickly saw the difference between print students and broadcast students in how we discussed issues in political science classes. Print students wanted the facts, in depth and full-range and balanced. Broadcast students wanted it pithy and sound-bitey (yeah, I know that's not a word). It came from the two different perspectives we brought to the job. The broadcaster had 30 seconds to give you all the news they could and then they had to move on. Not a lot of depth possible. The newspaper had the advantage.

Some people understood that and so, while they might catch the news on the radio in the car, they read the paper to get the full story. Then along came the 24-hour news cycle of CNN. Fox and the others do it too. They're still mostly giving you the lead facts of a story rather than in-depth reporting, but people don't seem to realize that. They soak themselves in hearing the lead over and over and think that's getting all the facts.

The Internet, however, changed the game.

Internet Advantage
Sometime not too long after I graduated in the 1980s, the broadcast media became infested with entertainment focus. They were still delivering the lead facts of stories that had a great deal more involved than what broadcasters could cover, but they were now all razzle-dazzle. How was a newspaper to compete? Well, many of them did so by cutting staff. Now there was no copy-editor to make sure the reporter was spelling correctly or anyone double checking facts. Pretty soon, the newspapers couldn't cut staff any further, so they started tearing a page from the broadcast game book. Add some razzle-dazzle -- if the news isn't exciting enough, create some exciting news.

That's when they lost me, btw.

The Internet came along with the advantages of print. They can do a long story that actually covers the facts. However, the big scary part of this is that the Internet "news" does not at this time subscribe to the Ethics of Journalism (yes, there really is a code of ethics for journalists. I'm sure someone can find an old copy in the Library of Congress, dust it off, scrape off the barnacles and read it). I like some Internet news sources, but I'm always acutely aware that I can't trust those sources. That was part of what caused me to leave journalism, because I saw such a disregard for ethics. I was trained to balance a news article. Even if I didn't personally agree with all sides, I was taught to present them. That's been lost. If the Internet wants to take the place of traditional newspapers, they're going to have to subscribe to journalism ethics and they're also going to have to actually investigate the facts. You can't do that from your bedroom. You have to go out into the field.

One last thing -- the coming of notebook sized computers has also gutted the print newspaper because you can read the news online far more comfortably on a commuter train than you can with a traditional newspaper.

I CELEBRATE THEIR DEMISE!
My local newspaper is another Liberal Rag and when my paid-up subscription expires in 4 months, I QUIT!! I hope they all go broke and they deserve it. They won't print any news of Tea Parties but will fill the front page with every single story of gun violence anywhere in the country. Their Editorials totally SUCK and are always slanted to the left. The paper I am telling to take a hike is the Eugene Oregon Register Guard. Fishwrapper!!

Paper
Our local free weekly shopper paper has more journalistic integrity than our daily paper. My husband likes the sports, I like the funnies, brides and obituaries. The coupons, TV guide and sale rotos are handy on Sunday, but it's basically worthless.
Sign Up to Post Your CommentsSign Up to Post Your Comments
If you are already registered, click here to login. Otherwise, please take a few seconds to register with Townhall.com. Once you sign up, you’ll be able to post your comments immediately, use the action center, get podcasts, and more!
Note: Fields marked with a red asterisk (*) are required.
Salutation:
First Name:
*
Last Name:
*
Email:
*
Nickname:
*
Note: Nick name will be shown when you post comments.
Address 1:
*
Address 2:
City:
*
State:
*
Zip:
*
Phone:
      
Your daily must-read of conservative columns, cartoons and news. Coulter, Sowell, Krauthammer and more.
(Bi-Weekly) We highlight the best opportunities from our partners for surveys, action items and more.