|
|
|
March 2nd, 2009
 | 11:39 am - consider how many newspapers I've linked here, or quoted...
It's no secret to anyone who's awake that newspapers in the US are in trouble. Too many of them have been treated as cash cows for too long, with the organization run more by the advertising side than the editorial, with the content quality ignored as long as the ads are there. Never mind that people who buy the paper want the news and put up with the majority of the ads; they will want the coupon sections, which are pure cash for the paper, but they also want to know what happened at the city council meeting and whether the zoning on Prospect Street is changing and what that means for kids walking to school.
This Post article looks at the way the businesses have been run. ( and a way of life is ending )
Thing is, newspapers do make money. They just don't do it the way money managers think they should. Considering the current performance of money managers in other areas, why are newspapers even listening to them?
Hearst is choosing now to launch an e-reader for newspapers. Nice idea, but can you use it to do the crossword puzzle? Can you read it in the bathtub safely? And, the biggest question, will it keep newspapers alive and reporters and editors working and news covered as it should be covered?
Imagine for a moment, if you will, a world without newspapers.( an exercise in the future )
A Senate panel is going to investigate the CIA, and not a moment too soon. And someone official should investigate FEMA-New Orleans as well.
Why is Republican Sen. Jim DeMint so afraid of the Fairness Doctrine?
The Wyoming state Senate killed a bill that would have benefitted small businesses with fewer than 100 employees -- which is nearly all the small businesses in rural Wyoming. This is short-term short-sightedness; successful businesses pay far more taxes than unsuccessful ones, and giving small businesses a little help now would have resulted in much more profit in the future.
Will we get a White House farm?
Bush's standards for air pollutants are found 'contrary to law'.
Nine justices, seven aphorisms, five opinions in a case that could be seen as concerning either public forums or government speech.
Ocean circulation is changing; what does that mean? Along with the changes mentioned here, there's another that is of interest. Since Greenland is melting, and the glaciers there are decreasing in size, that will result in less cold water moving south along the east cost of the US in the future to be warmed along the equator and move back up past Africa to warm Europe and keep Britain and Ireland temperate. With that belt of moderate water slowing down, it may be likely that the British Isles, Ireland, and western Europe are in for much longer and more severe winters; I have no idea what may happen in the summers. But this doesn't just affect our weather; it affects the fish stocks as well, since for a while there will be more freshwater mixing with the salt. I have no idea how this will change things.
A computer the size you could plug into a wall. Wave-powered electricity in the UK and Ireland.
Homophobic and ignorantly prudish censorship in Kansas. Or, more precisely, restriction of reading material in such a way as to make it difficult for people to exercise their freedom to read what they want at the public library. If you're a kid and you think you might be gay, and you want to learn more, are you really going to walk up in front of God and everyone and ask at the desk for The Joy of Gay Sex? If it were on the shelves, you might flip through, learn something, put it back, and be able to be subtle about it, but not if it's something you have to ask for.
Nationalization isn't scary; we already have it for utilities, for instance.
Harvard's transformer houses made of cloth.
Plantcare.com. Indoor household plant online encyclopedia, and more.
Cleaning supplies made from salt.
Watching 'Watchmen'. I've seen a lot of nasty comments online from Watchmen fans dissing reviewers of the movie; such comments are not terribly bright. A movie this big has to make its box office from a much wider group of people than just graphic novel fans; if it is unable to stand on its own, it will be considered a flop, regardless of how accurate it may be to the original version. It has to be able to make sense to the person who walks into the theatre thinking, "hmm, I liked Batman, maybe I'll go to see it" -- and it has to be able to get good reviews from people seeing the movie who have absolutely no interest in the graphic novel world at all. Batman and other more conventional superhero movies stand because you don't have to have read 50 years of comics to understand them; they're part of the mental background in the culture. If Watchmen-the-movie is to stand, it will have to do so on its own merits, away from the graphic novel, and those merits have to be cinematic and accessible to the ordinary viewer.
Imagining the tenth dimension. Infinitely cool.
|
|
|