The decline of our civilization...

[Chip Sylverne]

My definition of newspaper is different from most. I read FT daily, the Economist weekly, and the Atlantic, Foreign Affairs, and Harvard Business Review monthly. These, to me, are "news" and "analysis" sources; plus the internet, and social reading I do (history, food, lit), all fill in the gaps. And, until last Friday night, I had no clue what Sham-wow was, never mind who this guy is. (I don't have TV, broadcast or cable, at home. Just DVD's and VHS)

Cheers,

-Andrew

Say what you will about it's political point of view, it's hard to find better wordsmiths than those contributing to the New Yorker. HBR? Had enough of that in grad school.

As for TV, I have a feeling you would enjoy The Simpson's immensely.

 

[alaskaflyer]

But my father is right: There is indeed some elusive thing about reading from a printed page that the Web can't duplicate.


-Rich

That will change when he, you, me and folks currently over the age of thirty are gone. I was pushed to read the paper online when I moved to areas of the country where you couldn't easily get a copy like your Dad. Now I like it and wouldn't go back if I lived next door to the printing plant.

What won't change is a need for the same types of professionals currently reporting in ink, on FM radio, and TV to be reporting on "on-demand" electronic formats, alongside the blogosphere.

One of the best papers for a political scientist is the Christian Science Monitor. I used to sit in back of my poli sci courses and read it instead of paying attention to the lecturer. It went paperless last year. It is still a great "paper" (IMO.) Go figure. Now I'd use my iPhone in class instead.

 

[astanley]

Say what you will about it's political point of view, it's hard to find better wordsmiths than those contributing to the New Yorker. HBR? Had enough of that in grad school.

As for TV, I have a feeling you would enjoy The Simpson's immensely.

I prefer the Atlantic to the New Yorker, if only because I hate New York :wink2:

I'm a huge Simpsons fan. I have a whole stack of seaons on DVD at home...

Cheers,

-Andrew

 

[wsuffa]

Bill,

That is true, but those same newspapers all have web sites where you can get the same news either for free or a subscription. If you want to read an article like a paper, you can always print it out. I just think its better, faster, less expensive and more environmentally friendly to get it electronically. YMMV.

Most are free, and the advertising model really doesn't work. The only one that's had reasonable success with the subscription model is WSJ, in part because they started with a subscription model. No one is really able to fully monetize the online versions yet, in part because there are so many places for an advertiser to place ads on the web (low barrier to entry) and so few folks selling the local advertising on the web.

But, I agree with you, it is favorable to read on the web due to faster update cycle. Then again, if there isn't any content (e.g. if the web-only folks don't employ the same or better caliber of reporter), then no one is going to read the content, making it harder to get advertising.

As for environmental benefits, they're overrated . The paper in newspaper is biodegradable.... There is no such thing as global warming. Stopping there to avoid the Spin Zone penalty